In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court’s Nagpur bench has acquitted a man accused of raping his minor daughter, citing lack of evidence beyond the victim’s testimony. Justice G.A. Sanap passed the order on December 5, 2024, although it was made available only recently.
The man, previously convicted by a trial court in February 2021 under charges of rape as per the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), had been sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. The High Court, however, found substantial doubt regarding the credibility and motive behind the allegations, ultimately overturning his conviction.
“Mistakes Can Occur”: Court Weighs Human Psychology
While deliberating the case, Justice Sanap acknowledged the unusual nature of the allegations, stating:
“It is true that in ordinary circumstances, a daughter would not level such an allegation against her own father. Similarly, in ordinary circumstances, the father would also not sexually assault his own daughter. However, considering human psychology and tendency, mistakes can occur, even in the case of the father, who is an ordinary saviour of children.”
The Court noted that the case rested solely on the minor’s testimony, with no corroborating evidence to substantiate the allegations.
Familial Dynamics and Motive Questioned
The allegations were brought by a 14-year-old girl, who claimed that her father had abused her since she was in the third grade, stopping only after she disclosed the incidents to her maternal grandmother. However, the defense argued that the accusations stemmed from familial disputes, particularly the father’s objection to the daughter’s relationship with a young boy, whom she later married.
Justice Sanap emphasized the father’s role as the primary caretaker of the family after his wife abandoned them when he was 25. He single-handedly raised his children and supported his aged mother without remarrying. This, the Court said, was a crucial factor in assessing the allegations.
“The father who looked after the victim in the absence of her mother, would not commit such an act with his daughter. The appellant single-handedly looked after the well-being of the children and his old aged mother. The appellant must have toiled hard to earn and sustain the family. This is another vital circumstance.”
The Court further observed:
“In my view, the strong opposition to the marriage by the appellant seems to be the cause of his misery. It seems that his approach was proper. He was not wrong when he suggested that the boy was not the proper match for the victim. The appellant being guardian of the victim, was the proper person to find a suitable match for his daughter.”
Conviction Quashed
Concluding that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction and that doubts persisted regarding the daughter’s motives, the Court acquitted the man.
