Bombay HC upholds life-sentence given to 55-yr-old man for raping domestic helper's daughter
The man had raped his domestic help's daughter and had impregnated her. The child has been given to bal kalyan samiti.
The Bombay High Court at Nagpur Bench recently upheld the life imprisonment awarded to a 55-year-old man. The man had been convicted for raping a minor girl- the daughter of his domestic help.
The division bench of Justices Rohit Deo and Urmila Joshi Phalke held that the man, who was a fatherly figure to the victim betrayed her 'trust'.
The accused was under moral obligation to protect the child in the background that he was having his own daughter but he destroyed her future life. The accused had destroyed the physical body of the victim and degraded the very soul of helpless girl, the court observed.
The case was lodged by the mother of the victim who at the time of incident was only 16 years old.
The mother stated in the First Information Report that she along with her daughter (the victim) used to live with the the convict as his domestic help.
The father of the victim had already died and after some time, the mother got married to someone else, however, the victim stayed with the convict and his family which consisted his sons and daughters.
The convict established sexual relations with the victim on three-four occasions as a result of which she got pregnant.
Thereafter, the convict left her at the hospital while she was in labour and she delivered a child at the tender age of sixteen.
The Trial court found the convict guilty for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(f)(j)(i)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment.
Before the high court in appeal, the counsel for the convict argued that the victim was having a love affair with another person and the pregnancy was a result of that relation. He claimed that the convict had been falsely implicated in the matter.
Whereas Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the evidence of victim girl corroborated by the Medical evidence as well as DNA report sufficiently showed that it was the accused who committed sexual intercourse with the victim which resulted into her pregnancy.
The high court noted that the prime evidence on which prosecution relied upon was the scientific nature in the form of DNA report.
The court further remarked on the capabilities of modern DNA testing.
"The DNA unparalleled testing ability has both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty," the court said.
Therefore, the division bench dismissed the man's appeal against conviction under section 376(2)(f)(i)(i)(n) of the IPC.