HC pulls up Pocso court, sets aside conviction of man sentenced to 20 yrs

JABALPUR: The Jabalpur bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court has set aside the conviction of a man sentenced to 20 years in jail for the abduction and rape of a teenager, observing that the trial court failed to take cognisance of the ossification test report that suggested the teenager was 17 to 19 years. hands of a prisoner on prison bars (Getty Images/Vetta) A bench of justices Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh also underscored that the victim, in her statement before the magrate, had not accused the man of sexual assault but underlined that she was in a consensual relationship with the man, but accused him of rape out of fear of her parents. Her subsequent statement clearing him of the charge was not taken into account since she was a minor. But the trial judge should have taken note of the ossification report, which put her age at 17-19, the high court said in its August 14 judgment. “Another interesting but horrific aspect is that despite there being availability of X-ray report on record as was ordered Dr. Geeta Barmate that has neither been exhibited nor court deem it proper to mark it as a Court Exhibit. This report prima facie appears to be in favour of the accused in as much as the Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology Modi makes a mention of crest of illium fusion in females is between the age of 17 to 19 years. When this aspect is taken into consideration, then the range of age of the victim will be between 17 to 19 years.” “…we are constrained to observe that trial court committed several irregularities. It, firstly, did not take cognizance of ossification test report available on record and, secondly, it did not pose questions under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. to the accused on the basis of the DNA test report. “It is surprising to note that despite regular training in the Madhya Pradesh State Judicial Academy, learned trial courts are consently failing to perform their duties as a Judge. Though DNA report is exhibited as Ex.C/1 on 06/10/2023 i.e. after closer of the prosecution evidence, but, trial court did not deem it proper to record supplementary statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and confront him to the circumstances,” the bench added. “Therefore, as per the ossification report, which was promptly drawn within one month of the incident, since there can be an error of a year or two and when that error is taken into consideration, then victim will be deemed to be an adult, benefit is required to be accrued in favour of the appellant. Accordingly, when that benefit is extended and statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are taken into consideration as are contained in Ex.P/3, then impugned judgment of conviction cannot be upheld,” the bench said.