Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.S.RAMESH, SUNDER MOHAN
Krishnaraj @ Thangaraj – Appellant
Versus
State represented by Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and charges. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for and against the conviction. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments regarding the reliance on dna evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's reasoning on the insufficiency of evidence. (Para 6 , 14) |
| 5. issues with dna evidence reliability and chain of custody. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. acquittal and conclusion of the appeal. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon him, vide judgment dated 06.09.2021 in Spl.S.C.No.4 of 2018, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, 2012, Vellore.
2.......
(i) It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant who was the relative of the victim aged about 17 years at the time of occurrence, had kidnapped her on 03.04.2013 at about 3.00 p.m., and took her to a bush near Murugan Temple and committed penetrative sexual assault; that thereafter, on 06.04.2013 committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim, promising that he would marry her, as a result of which the victim became pregnant.
(ii) On 20.02.2014, PW1, the ste
DNA evidence requires proper documentation and chain of custody to be admissible; conviction cannot solely rely on such evidence without corroborating proof.
DNA evidence must be corroborated by other evidence; conviction cannot rely solely on DNA reports without proper documentation and preservation.
The integrity and chain of custody of DNA evidence are crucial for its admissibility in court, and failure to establish these can lead to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially when the primary witness turns hostile, and reliance on inconsistent testimony and improperly handled DNA evidence is insufficient....
Prosecution failed to prove victim's age and that the assaults were not consensual, leading to the overturning of the conviction.
The court established that in cases involving minors, consent is irrelevant to sexual offences, with the victim's age determined primarily through school records, highlighting strict legal protection....
(1) In order to attract offence under POCSO Act prosecution has to establish that victim girl is a child as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of POCSO Act.(2) It is highly unsafe to convict a person only....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
