Forensic DNA evidence establishing paternity is sufficient to ground a conviction for sexual assault even if the victim and witnesses turn hostile. Provided the chain of custody and scientific procedures are robust and the accused has been given adequate opportunity to challenge the evidence, such findings constitute reliable proof.

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.)

The sole accused in the present appeal has assailed the judgement passed by the Fast Track Mahila Court, Theni, in Special S.C.No.27 of 2020, dated 31.07.2023, wherein the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the “Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012” (hereinafter referred to as “Act” for brevity) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment and was also convicted for offence under Section 506 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant, who was aged about 40 years, called the victim girl, who was aged about 13 years, to the house of one Balaji on 18.01.2020 at 2.00 PM and committed penetrative sexual assault on her. He also threatened the victim girl not to disclose the occurrence to anyone. The further case of the prosecution is that the appellant repeatedly committed the said offence and once again threatened the victim girl on 16.02.2020 not to reveal about the same to anyone.

3. The incident came to light and PW1, who is the mother of the victim girl, gave a complaint (Exhibit P6) to PW11 based on which an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.125 of 2020 (Exhibit P7) for offences under Section 5(l) r/w 6 of the Act and Section 506(1) of IPC.

4. The investigation was taken over by PW14 and the investigation officer went to the scene of crime on 29.03.2020 at about 11.00 AM and recorded the statements of the victim girl and her parents and others. An observation mahazar (Exhibit P11) and rough sketch (Exhibit P12) were prepared. The accused person was arrested on the same day at about 15.30 hours and he was produced before the concerned court and remanded to judicial custody.

5. PW14 proceeded to collect the school certificate (Exhibit P4) from the Headmaster of the Government High School (PW6). He ascertained the date of birth of the victim girl as 29.05.2006. The statement of the Headmaster was also recorded.

6. The victim girl was subjected to medical examination and the medical examination was conducted by PW12, who found that the victim girl was five weeks pregnant. The certificate of examination (Exhibit P8) was issued and the following finding has been rendered:

“Examination:

The person examined was moderately built and moderately nourished. Her physical and mental status was normal for her age. Her secondary sexual characters were well developed gives history of 02 months of ammenorhoea, Per abdomen examination – soft. Pervaginal examination hymen not intact, vagina admits one finger, no discharge. No external injuries over breast or genitalia Uterus – anteverted bulky. UPT – Positive.”

7. The victim girl was produced before the Judicial Magistrate and her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded (Exhibit P1).

8. After recording the statements of the witnesses under Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C., and after completion of investigation, the police report came to be laid before the Special Court which was taken on file in Special S.C.No.27 of 2020.

9. The Special Court framed charges against the accused person for offences under Sections 5(l) r/w 6 of the Act, Section 506(2) and 506(1) of IPC. The accused person denied the charges when he was questioned.

10. The prosecution examined PW1 to PW14 and marked Exhibit