In a criminal prosecution, a DNA report cannot be the sole basis for conviction if the prosecution fails to establish a secure, error-free chain of custody and proper preservative methods for biological samples, particularly when the victim turns hostile and there is no corroborative evidence.

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(1)(3) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO: (A) GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.10.2024 IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/FTSC-II, (POCSO), D.K., MANGALURU THEREBY ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376(2) OF IPC & 6 OF THE POCSO ACT, 2012; (B) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.10.2024 IN SPL.C.NO.98/2023 PASSED BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/FTSC-II, (POCSO), D.K., MANGALURU, THEREBY ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376(2) OF IPC & SEC. 6 OF THE POCSO ACT, 2012 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL; (C) CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376(2) OF IPC & SEC. 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

This appeal preferred by the State is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 26.10.2024 passed by the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge/FTSC-II (POCSO) D.K., Mangaluru in Spl.C.No.98/2023.

2. The charges were framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. The trial Court vide impugned judgment was pleased to acquit the accused, hence this appeal.

3. We have heard Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record.

4. It is the case of prosecution that the accused being the neighbour resident of the minor victim girl, got acquainted with her and became friendly with her. On 3rd Sunday of December 2022 at about 11 a.m., he came near victim's house and by seducing her, told her to come near a hillock situated at Thumbegudde of Naravi Village, Belthangady Taluk. When she went to the said place, by promising that he will marry her, committed penetrative sexual assault against her will. Again in the month of January 2023, he committed the similar act with her twice and again on 05.03.2023, he repeated the said act in the same place, due to which she became pregnant.

5. It is the specific case of prosecution that the accused by seducing the victim girl, a minor aged about 17 years, subjected her to repeated penetrative sexual assault, due to which she became pregnant and thereby committed the charged offences. In order to establish that the victim was a minor as on the date of incident, the prosecution has got examined the school records such as, study certificate-Ex.P7, certified copy of admission application-Ex.P8, copy of Birth Certificate-Ex.P9 and school admission Register-Ex.P10. PW5, the in-charge headmaster of Govt. Higher Primary School, Naravi, was examined in support of the above documents. As per the Birth Certificate and the school records, date of birth of the victim is 06.03.2006. The trial Court has taken into consideration the above documents wherein it is seen that the victim studied from I to VIII standard. From the evidence of PW5 and the documents furnished in support of the proof of date of birth of the victim, the trial Court has come to the conclusion that the victim was a minor aged 17 years as on the date of commission of the offence. The said finding is in favour of the prosecution.

6. Insofar as the charge framed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC an