The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has voiced dissatisfaction over the failure to adhere to the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the collection and preservation of evidence in cases of sexual offences
Representational Picture/iStock
The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has voiced dissatisfaction over the failure to adhere to the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the collection and preservation of evidence in cases of sexual offences.
ADVERTISEMENT
The division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Abhay Waghwase, in their judgment on Tuesday, criticized the police and forensic experts for displaying "utter disregard" for the prescribed SOP, reflecting what they described as a "very insensitive attitude."
The High Court took this stance while quashing an order from a special court in Maharashtra's Parbhani district, which had convicted a 21-year-old man for allegedly raping a six-year-old girl in 2018. The court also overturned the life sentence imposed on the accused, citing the prosecution's failure to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and extending the benefit of doubt to the defendant.
Expressing serious doubt about the collection and preservation of evidence in the case, the High Court emphasized the need for sensitivity among all stakeholders, including medical experts, police, forensic experts, and prosecutors. The court highlighted the importance of adhering to guidelines issued by the health and home ministries of the government of India.
"We expect periodic sensitization of all stakeholders by conducting regular workshops and seminars of all such stakeholders at one venue and at the same time. Such a platform could be used for interactions amongst themselves to meet the legal requirements," the High Court stated.
In a directive to the state government, the court called for the organization of periodic sensitization programs for all stakeholders and suggested that authorities keep themselves well-informed about the guidelines issued by relevant ministries.
The case involved an accusation that in November 2018, the accused man assaulted the victim as she was returning home, taking her to an abandoned building nearby where he allegedly raped her. The girl reported the incident to her father, leading to a police complaint and subsequent arrest of the man.
The accused, in his appeal, claimed he was falsely implicated, citing vague identification by the girl and alleging lapses and deviations by medical experts, police, and forensic experts during evidence collection.
The High Court, in its order, highlighted non-compliance with the SOP laid down for the collection, maintenance, and safe custody of biological and non-biological evidence. It expressed dismay at the state of affairs in handling evidence in a serious case of rape on a minor.
The court noted that lapses and defects in evidence collection had rendered the entire evidence doubtful and could not be the basis for conviction, despite the serious nature of the offence.
In addition to directing the state government to formulate guidelines for test identification parades in cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the High Court called for suggestions on a Standard Operating Procedure, considering the confidentiality of victim details and precautionary measures during identification parades.
The compensation amount of Rs 46,000 directed by the special court for the victim was deemed "meagre and inadequate" by the High Court. The court instructed the Parbhani District Legal Services Authority to conduct an inquiry into the victim's status and recommend appropriate steps for meaningful rehabilitation if the victim has not received compensation from the state government. (With inputs from agencies)
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
