'Inhuman, Can't Ignore Her Trauma': Karnataka High Court Convicts Father For Sexually Assaulting Minor Daughter

Observing that, "there is no reason for the victim girl to give false evidence against her own father," the Karnataka High Court recently set aside an acquittal order passed by the trial court and sentenced the accused to suffer 10 years rigorous imprisonment, for sexually assaulting his daughter when she was a minor. A division bench of Justice H.T.Narendra Prasad and Justice Rajendra Badamikar noted that the victim must have undergone a lot of mental agony and shock by her father's act. It thus allowed the appeal filed by the prosecution and set aside the trial court judgement dated February 3, 2017, acquitting Asif Rasoolsab Sanadi. The bench held the accused guilty under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal code and Section 6 of POCSO Act and directed him to pay a fine of Rs 50,000 to the victim girl (who is now married) by way of compensation towards her welfare. Case Background: The accused being the father of the victim girl aged about 14 years and knowing fully well that she is minor had committed forcible sexual assault on her since about 9 months and also on 19.05.2015 by wrongfully confining her in the house . When the victim girl had been to the house of her maternal grandmother, the accused went there to secure her and at that time, the victim girl refused to go with the accused and disclosed the fact of sexual assault by the accused. The grandmother took the victim girl to the police station and a complaint came to be lodged. Following which FIR was registered and the victim was subjected to medical examination. Further, her statement under Section 164 of CrPC was recorded before the Magistrate and the accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined all 11 witnesses. After hearing the arguments, the trial court observed that evidence of the victim, P.W.6 and other witnesses including the medical evidence is not at all trustworthy and thereby acquitted the accused for the offences alleged against him. Being aggrieved by this judgement of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal. The Prosecution argued that sufficient materials were placed on record but the trial court ignored the same. Further, P.W.1-victim has clearly supported the case of the prosecution and her evidence is in consonance with the allegations made in the complaint as well as statement under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C., but the Special Judge on assumptions and presumptions has ignored the same. It was also contend that P.W.6-maternal grandmother of the victim and the Magistrate who has recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C. have also supported the case of the prosecution and P.W.5-Medical Officer has fully supported, but without any proper reasons, the Special Judge ignored the said evidence which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. The Accused-father on the other hand submitted that P.W.1 is a tutored witness and considering the animosity between accused and P.W.6 as admitted by P.W.1, it is evident that her evidence is not trustworthy. Doubts were also raised on the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate. Court findings: The court on going through the evidence of the victim noted that though defence counsel has cross-examined the victim and elicited regarding strained relationship between P.W.6 and the accused, it did not deny the sexual assault during cross-examination of P.W.1. On perusing the testimony of other witnesses the court said, "The evidence of P.W.5 (maternal grandmother) discloses that victim did undergone sexual assault. The accused being the father is unable to explain as to under what circumstances the victim has undergone sexual assault and as per the prosecution case, the accused himself has committed sexual assault on his daughter i.e., the victim. Apart from that, the victim girl and P.W.6-grandmother have supported the case of the prosecution and in the cross-examination there is no denial of sexual assault committed as alleged. There is no reason for these two witnesses to give false evidence." Junking the argument that the mother-in-law and the accused had an ongoing dispute, the court observed, "P.W.6 is mother-in-law of the accused and there are no strong circumstances to show that she can go to the extent of risking the life of her granddaughter and her daughter." It added "Further, P.W.1-victim girl has no reason for giving false evidence against her own father." Trial court proceeded with a biased mind towards the victim The bench on perusal of the judgement of the trial court, said, "It is evident that the trial court did not consider the position of the child and the trauma undergone by the child while facing sexual assault. The reasoning of the trial court does not inspire the consciousness of the court and the trial court on surmises and assumptions presumed certain...

'Inhuman, Can't Ignore Her Trauma': Karnataka High Court Convicts Father For Sexually Assaulting Minor Daughter

Mustafa Plumber

Tags