The Allahabad High Court has overturned the life sentence of an Uttarakhand-based doctor and his brother accused of sexually assaulting the doctor’s minor daughter, ruling that child witness testimony must be evaluated with extreme caution when child protection laws are used as leverage in matrimonial disputes.
A division bench comprising Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Jai Krishan Upadhyay cleared both men of all charges, reversing a conviction issued by a Special POCSO Court in Varanasi. The decision ends a second period of incarceration for the doctor, who had served over 18 months in prison following the trial court’s February 2025 verdict, in addition to spending more than a year in custody following his initial arrest in 2018.
High Court Calls for Sagacity in Parental Conflict Cases
Addressing the reliance on minor witnesses during custody and marital battles, the High Court emphasized that while children are expected to tell the truth, prolonged living arrangements with an estranged parent can influence their perception. The bench observed that when a child becomes convinced that the custodial parent has been wronged, they may sincerely testify to false allegations. Consequently, the judges held that courts must examine child testimony with heightened sagacity whenever Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act provisions are invoked against a parent.
Bench Identifies Signs of Tutoring and Unreliable Evidence
Upon reviewing the record, the bench concluded that the victim’s testimony was untrustworthy due to maternal tutoring. The judges noted that the child had resided continuously with her mother since 2017, absorbing the psychological strain of the broken marriage. Pointing out that the girl referred to her father by his name during court proceedings, the bench determined that she had been conditioned to harbor ill-will toward him. Additionally, statements from domestic workers at the father’s residence contained no allegations against the accused, while photographs submitted in court demonstrated a warm relationship where the child was seen hugging her father affectionately.
Origins of the Complaint and Delayed Reporting
The legal proceedings began in June 2018, when the victim’s mother—also a physician based in Varanasi—filed a First Information Report (FIR). According to the complaint, the child had spent ten days with her father in Uttarakhand during school holidays in March 2018. The mother claimed the matter came to light two months later when the girl refused to write “dear father” during a homework assignment and reported improper touching. While the mother cited family reputation and a relative’s illness as reasons for delaying the FIR, the High Court dismissed this explanation, finding the delay to be a calculated effort to implicate the husband in offenses carrying life imprisonment.
Financial Conflict and Procedural History
Defense counsel Rajiv Dwivedi presented details showing that the criminal allegations arose alongside a financial dispute between the couple dating back to 2017. The conflict began over the location of a new hospital facility, with the wife favoring Varanasi and the husband constructing the facility in Uttarakhand. Relations worsened when the wife withdrew as guarantor for a Rs 3 crore construction loan, coinciding with the filing of the assault complaint.
The case was initially investigated in Uttarakhand, where the father was arrested before receiving bail from the Supreme Court in 2019 after a year in detention. The trial was subsequently transferred back to Varanasi following a Supreme Court petition by the mother. In February 2025, the Special POCSO Court sentenced both brothers to life imprisonment for rape, repeated assault, and gangrape. While the doctor’s brother previously secured bail pending appeal, the doctor remained imprisoned until the High Court’s complete acquittal order.
