Court Overturns Conviction of Babul Baishya Citing Discrepancies Between Medical Evidence and Victim Testimony
In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court has acquitted Babul Baishya, previously convicted under Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The decision was rendered by a division bench comprising Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Shamima Jahan, overturning the conviction by the Special Judge, Udalguri, due to inconsistencies between the medical evidence and the victim's testimony.
The case arose from allegations that Baishya raped a minor on April 11, 2017, leading to her pregnancy. However, medical examinations conducted revealed that the victim's pregnancy dated back to February 2017, two months prior to the alleged incident. This critical discrepancy undermined the prosecution's case, as highlighted in the court's judgment.
The victim had filed an FIR on October 17, 2017, asserting that she was assaulted by Baishya while returning from the fields. The subsequent medical examination, however, contradicted her account, showing a gestation period that predated the alleged incident. The court noted that the testimony of the victim and other witnesses, including her parents, could not be deemed credible against the backdrop of the medical evidence presented.
Furthermore, the court acknowledged that although attempts were made to conduct DNA profiling, insufficient samples thwarted efforts to establish paternity conclusively. The judgment underscored the importance of aligning evidentiary claims with scientific proof, especially in cases involving serious allegations such as rape.
The acquittal represents a critical examination of the burden of proof required in criminal cases, emphasizing the necessity for the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court directed the immediate release of Babul Baishya from custody, contingent on the absence of other charges against him.
In a gesture of appreciation, the court also commended the efforts of the legal aid counsel representing the accused, instructing the High Court Legal Services Committee to compensate her for her services.
Bottom Line :
Conviction under Section 376(3) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act was set aside due to inconsistency between medical evidence and the victim's testimony regarding the date of pregnancy and the alleged incident of rape.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code Section 376(3), Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Section 6, Section 42 of the POCSO Act.
Babul Baishya v. State of Assam, (Gauhati)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2965095
