Evidence contaminated, HC acquits Pocso convict
The prosecution has stated that the mother of the victim girl got acquainted with the accused, and both were living as husband and wife
Madras High Court
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court acquitted a stepfather who allegedly impregnated his stepdaughter, on the ground that the DNA evidence had been contaminated and set aside the life sentence.
“We cannot sustain the conviction based on the DNA test reports alone, especially in the absence of evidence regarding the drawing of samples, packing, and preservation of the abortus,” wrote a division bench comprising Justice SS Sundar and Sunder Mohan.
The bench also cited the observation from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pattu Rajan vs State of Tamil Nadu (2019).
“If DNA evidence is not properly documented, collected, packaged, and preserved, it would not meet the legal and scientific requirements for admissibility in a court of law,” read the judgment.
Care has to be taken to ensure that the samples collected are properly documented, packaged, and preserved, wrote the judgment. In the instant case, the prosecution has failed to show the evidence of how the samples were collected, packed, and preserved.
The prosecution has stated that the mother of the victim girl got acquainted with the accused, and both were living as husband and wife. In that situation, it is stated that the accused repeatedly had intercourse with the victim by making her unconscious by giving sleeping tablets in the juice.
The mother of the victim supported the accused and advised the victim to adjust with him.
After the victim got pregnant, her mother took her to the hospital to abort. However, the hospital informed the police, and subsequently, a case was registered against the accused under the Pocso Act.
In 2018, the Villupuram Sessions Judge found the accused guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment with Rs 1 lakh as a fine.
Aggrieved by the life sentence the accused moved the High Court to set aside the conviction.
Additional Public Prosecutor, A Gokulakrishnan, contended there is no infirmity in the finding of the trial court.
However, the bench observed that there was ambiguity in the collection of DNA evidence from the abortus tissue and set the accused at liberty.
