DNA evidence cannot solely determine guilt in sexual assault cases; corroborative testimony is crucial for a conviction.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)

The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in Special Case No.20/2016 dated 27.08.2021 by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge - FTSC-1 U.K., Karwar (Special Court for trial of cases filed under POCSO) Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned Sessions Judge' for short), whereby the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused/respondent for the offences punishable under Section 376(2) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO ACT .

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as follows:

The accused being the permanent resident of Savadatti, Belagavi District, came to the village of victim-PW.12 at Kibballi Village, Balur for coolie work of cutting trees in the forest and came in acquaintance with victim, who aged about 17 years. On 15.01.2015 at about 9:00 p.m., near the garden land of one Kalla Beera Gouda within the Kyadagi forest area, the accused consummated her by persuading that he will marry her. Later, they both were sexually active. Due to the same, the victim became pregnant. Thereafter, the accused started to avoid her. Left with no other option, she lodged a complaint before the Siddapura Police, Karwar on 29.01.2016 against accused as per Ex.P20. On the strength of Ex.P20, the Police registered FIR against the respondent-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO ACT in Crime No.37/2016 as per Ex.P21. Subsequently, PWs.11, 16, 17 and 21 the Police officers of the Siddapura Police conducted investigation and laid charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO ACT before the Special Court. In the meantime, the victim delivered a girl baby. As such, the Police filed additional charge sheet against the accused.

3. In order to prove the charges leveled against the accused before the trial Court, the prosecution examined 22 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.22 and marked 37 documents as per Ex.P1 to P37.

4. After assessing the oral and documentary evidence, learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused for the charges leveled against him. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by the State.

5. Heard the learned HCGP Sri A.M.Gundawade, for the appellant-State and the learned counsel Sri Jagadish Patil and Sri M.C.Hukkeri, for the respondent-accused.

6. The primary contention of learned HCGP is that the trial Court erred while acquitting the accused without appreciating the evidence on record in the right perspective. He contended that though the victim and her parents turned hostile to the prosecution case, it is established in their evidence that the victim was aged about 17 years at the time of incident and gave birth to a child. Further, the DNA report- Ex.P33 established that the accused is the biological father of the child. In such circumstance, the prosecution has proved the charges leveled against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. This aspect of the matter is not properly appreciated by the trial Court. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-accused contended that the judgment challenged in this appeal does not suffer from any perversity or illegality. He further contended that the victim, her parents, the mahazar witnesses are turned hostile to the prosecution case. Except the testimony of official witnesses, there is no other independent corroborative piece of evidence available on record to prove the charges leveled against accused. He contended that the victim stated in her evidence that the accused has not committed sexual intercourse on her. In such circumstance, Ex.P33-DNA report cannot solely be relied to prove the charges leveled against the accused. Hence, the trial Court rightly appreciated this aspect and passed the impugned judgment which does not call for any interference. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal.

8