The presence of a tear in the hymen is not necessary in all cases of penetrative sexual assault: Gauhati HC
Last Updated on April 16, 2024 by News Desk
The tear in the hymen or the lack of genital injuries is not always a ground for disbelief in the testimony of the victim that she was subjected to the penetrative sexual assault.
It was explained by Justice Kaushik Goswami that the offense of penetrative sexual assault gets established the moment there is any kind or degree of insertion, even if it is superficial which may not cause any injuries or bruises.
The acquittal of the man took place by the trial court in this case where the man was accused of inserting his finger or ‘digital insertion’ in the vagina of the 13-year-old’s vagina.
The acquittal was done on the basis that there were no injuries that were caused to the girl.
The court also said that the testimony of the girl was believable with her giving every piece of detail as well as the same being corroborated with other evidence.
The version given by the victim has to be given utmost care before discerning it.
The court was dealing with the POCSO case where it was reported that the girl was sexually assaulted by the man in whose house stayed for studying.
She alleged that the accused tried taking her out and even groped her. She resisted the same and then committed sexual assault on her. Later, he took her back home.
She said that she disclosed the incident to her grandmother as well as to the wife of the man but they did not support her. Later, she was found crying in the school by her teacher and then the district child protection officer was informed.
A criminal complaint was eventually registered. The girl did not mention in the FIR that the fingers were inserted but she later disclosed the same and maintained the same, throughout the trial.
The HC observed that it may not have been easy for the victim to reveal the events in a piecemeal manner. It is also natural for her to feel uncomfortable to disclose to the male investigation officer whereas she was comfortable in sharing the instance of ‘digital insertion’ with her teacher.
The court said that her statements have been well supported by other witnesses.
The High Court set aside the decision of the trial court but no conviction took place as it was highlighted that wrong charges were framed. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the trial court.
Written By:- Shianjany Pradhan (@SHIANJANYPRADHAN)
