Conviction Sustained For Rape Of Child Below 12 Years: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has fortified the legal protections for minor victims by affirming a life sentence for the rape of an eight-year-old child, ruling that medical evidence of genital trauma and the consistent testimony of a minor prosecutrix outweigh investigative lapses or peripheral discrepancies. In a stern rebuke to perfunctory law enforcement, the Court simultaneously ordered departmental action against the Investigating Officer for failing to conduct elementary forensic steps in a case of such grave sexual violence.

A division bench comprising Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh adjudicated the criminal appeal challenging the conviction of a neighbour who forcibly assaulted a minor girl while her mother was away. The Court meticulously examined whether the absence of spermatozoa and contradictions regarding the victim's state of consciousness could undermine the prosecution's case, ultimately holding that the core narrative of a child victim must be viewed through a lens of trauma-informed sensitivity.

Key Takeaways

Primacy of Victim Testimony

Reiterated that the sole testimony of a prosecutrix, if found credible and consistent in its material particulars, is sufficient to sustain a conviction for sexual assault without mandatory corroboration.

Medical Evidence Interpretation

Clarified that the absence of spermatozoa does not negate the commission of rape, as penetration alone constitutes the offence under Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Trauma-Informed Scrutiny

Ruled that minor variations in a child witness's testimony, such as the exact timing of events or state of consciousness post-trauma, are peripheral and do not destroy the evidentiary substratum.

Accountability for Investigative Lapses

Established that while defective investigations (omission of site plans or medical exam of accused) do not automatically lead to acquittal, they warrant strict departmental consequences for the officers involved.

Court's Analysis on Child Testimony and Medical Corroboration

The Court relied heavily on the precedent set in State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh ( "(1996) 2 SCC 384": 1996 CaseBase(SC) 1295), emphasizing that courts must deal with sex crimes with utmost sensitivity and not be swayed by minor contradictions. The bench observed that the victim had consistently named the appellant in her fardbeyan, her statement under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure, and her court deposition.

Addressing the medical findings, the Court noted that multiple abrasions and a torn hymen were inconsistent with the defense's theory of a 'fall.' The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "The nature, location and multiplicity of the genital injuries, particularly the torn hymen accompanied by active bleeding and multiple abrasions, are far more consistent with penetrative assault than with a simple fall. ... penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of rape and emission of semen is not necessary."

Regarding the age of the victim, the Court accepted radiological evidence over the lack of birth records, confirming she was between 10 and 12 years old, thereby attracting enhanced penalties under Section 376(2)(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Strictures Against Investigating Officer

Despite upholding the conviction, the Court expressed "displeasure and dismay" regarding the quality of the investigation. The Court has following directions:

"The Senior Superintendent of Police, Darbhanga, is directed to examine the matter and to take appropriate departmental action against the concerned officer in accordance with law, after affording her a reasonable opportunity of hearing. A compliance report shall be submitted to this Court within three months."

Ratio

In cases of sexual assault on minors, the testimony of a child witness must be appreciated in the background of shock and trauma; where the core of the testimony is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence of penetrative injury, peripheral contradictions or investigative negligence cannot justify an acquittal. Under Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, once foundational facts of sexual assault on a child are established, a legal presumption of guilt arises against the accused which must be rebutted by cogent evidence.

Background

The incident occurred in May 2017 in Darbhanga, where the appellant entered the victim's house at 3:00 a.m. and committed the assault. The victim’s aunt arrived to find her bleeding profusely, while the accused fled the scene. The Trial Court convicted the appellant in 2018, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life. On appeal, the High Court scrutinized the evidence of six witnesses and medical reports. It dismissed the defense arguments regarding previous enmity and the noise of a neighboring wedding ceremony as insufficient to create reasonable doubt. The High Court affirmed the life sentence and the ₹6,00,000 compensation awarded to the victim under the Bihar Victim Compensation Scheme.

Case Details:
Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.1390 of 2018
Case Title: Bambam Mukhiya @ Govind Mukhiya v. The State of Bihar
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate; Mrs.Madhubala Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr.Dilip Kumar Sinha, APP

Source: 2026 CaseBase(PAT) 2696