Gujrat High Court acquitted the two accused convicted by lower court in a gang rape. The prosecutrix delivered a boy child in Oct, 2015 and claimed it a result of rape committed by the accused.

The victim claimed that the incident happened in beginning of 2015, in a evening eight o’clock, she went to the well to see the motor installation, where Sanjay ask her to carry the water pot from the well to his residence.

When she was returning, the duo Vajesing and Ajitkumar suddenly appeared and one by one committed rape. The victim girl also claimed that the duo threatened to kill parents after the duo committed rape.

The family of victim claimed that, their daughter become pregnant due to the incident and she gave birth to a boy child on Oct 2015 at Kajada village in Rajasthan.

The family of victim also claimed that when the family enquire about the incident with all three, they did not state anything. At the time of incident the victim was 16 year old.

It was observed by court that, the victim was quite for almost seven months and then went to Rajasthan at the house of her relative. At Rajasthan, she delivered the baby and then secretly abandoned the baby in one school premises.

Then the abandoned infant was spotted by few people and they, in turn, informed the police. The police then come to know about the victim, where the victim first time revealed the incident, that the rape committed 9 month back. After the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed in 2016 under POCSO act and the duo was arrested.

The bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice A C Rao, considering various other observation held by different courts, opined that “DNA testing can make a virtually positive identification when the two samples match”.

The bench also observed that, based on the DNA test which indicates that

“none of the two appellants are the biological father of the child delivered by the prosecutrix”.

The bench also said that

“This is suggestive of the fact that the prosecutrix might be suppressing the true facts and she does not want to reveal the name of the real person who impregnated her”.

The bench, keeping in mind the DNA test report which completely proves the innocence and also said that evidence of the prosecutrix absolutely unreliable.

The bench also referred decision of Supreme Court in Raju and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2008) 15 SCC 133 as, In the said case, the Supreme Court held that the accused must be protected against the possibility of false implication.

“It cannot be lost sight of that rape causes the greatest distress and humiliation to the victim but at the same time a false allegation of rape can cause equal distress, humiliation and damage to the accused as well.”

Last week, the bench, based upon the various observation and referring verdicts held by different courts, the bench acquitted the duo and quashed the jail term by the lower courts.

“both the appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court against the two appellants herein in the Special (POCSO) Case No.14 of 2016 are hereby ordered to be quashed and set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all the charges. The appellants shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.”