In a significant verdict, the District Court of Chandigarh has acquitted a man facing charges of kidnapping and rape, observing that the alleged victim appeared “very happy” in photographs from a wedding reception attended by nearly 200 people.
The Court of Dr. Yashika, Additional District and Sessions Judge, held that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the girl was a minor at the time of the incident. Consequently, the court ruled that she was at liberty to enter into a consensual relationship with a person of her liking.
Background of the Case
The proceedings stemmed from a complaint lodged by the girl’s father on May 14, 2023. The complainant alleged that his daughter, whom he claimed was 15 years old, had left their home on May 12 without informing anyone. He accused the defendant of enticing her away on the pretext of marriage.
Following the complaint, the police registered an FIR and subsequently filed a chargesheet under Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 376(2)(n) (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The prosecution relied on medical examinations, including an ossification test that estimated the victim’s bone age to be between 15 and 16 years and dental age between 14 and 16 years.
The prosecution argued that the accused forcibly took the victim from her guardian’s custody and established forcible sexual relations with her multiple times over two years. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The Question of Age
A pivotal aspect of the judgment was the determination of the victim’s age. The court noted the absence of concrete documentary evidence, such as school records or Municipal Corporation birth records, to substantiate the claim that the girl was a minor.
Addressing the medical evidence, Judge Dr. Yashika applied the established legal principle regarding the margin of error in medical age estimation. The court observed:
“By applying the margin of error of principle of two years to the estimated age of victim, which is 15 to 16 and a half, the victim is held to be more than 18 years of age at the time of her examination… so if we presume the date of the offence as May 12, 2023, then at that time, the age of victim was more than 18 years.”
Observations on Consent and Conduct
The court found significant discrepancies in the prosecution’s narrative regarding coercion. The Judge placed strong reliance on the visual evidence from the marriage reception, noting that the event was a large gathering attended by 200 people.
“Otherwise also from the marriage and reception photographs, in which she is looking very happy,” the judgment noted.
The court further observed that it was unbelievable that the accused established physical relations against the girl’s wishes. Cross-examination revealed that the girl’s parental home was situated only 5-6 houses away from the accused’s residence. The court reasoned that she had ample opportunity to return home or raise an alarm if she had been held against her will.
“As far as the allegations of victim that she had been ravished by the accused is concerned, then here the girl was a grown-up, who could not be proved to be a child, and in such circumstances, had she been subjected to rape by the accused… she had every opportunity to raise alarm, but she never opted for the same suggesting the court that she had been a consenting party,” the Court stated.
The Verdict
Highlighting material contradictions between the statements of the victim and her father, the court concluded that the possibility of false implication could not be ruled out. The Judge remarked that it appeared the victim and her father had “twisted the story” regarding the enticing.
Drawing a final inference from the victim’s conduct, the court held that she had likely left with the accused of her own volition and was never kidnapped with the intention of forced illicit intercourse. Based on these findings, the court acquitted the accused of all charges.
