A quiet tension filled Courtroom at the Delhi High Court as Justice Amit Mahajan delivered the verdict. The appeal filed by Jahid convicted for sexually assaulting his stepdaughter was dismissed. Despite the victim and her family retracting their earlier statements, the High Court held that the conviction was still legally sound.
The Court made it clear: when medical and forensic findings directly support the prosecution, later hostility or backtracking cannot erase the original truth.
Background
The allegations date back to March 2016. According to the initial complaint, the minor was assaulted around 2:30–3:00 AM while she was asleep. She first narrated the incident to her sister, who informed their mother, and the matter reached the police soon after. Both her police statement and her statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC directly named the stepfather.
Read also:- Redefining Aravallis: Supreme Court Steps In, But Will Monday’s Hearing Freeze Mining Across the Region?
Yet, by the time she testified in court, the narrative changed. The victim introduced an unknown person named “Vicky,” claiming he was the real assailant. But throughout trial, no identity, address, or trace of such a person emerged not even a hint of existence. The Court observed that this new name looked like a later invention.
Court’s Observations
The Court pointed out that the victim’s withdrawal didn’t seem random it reflected a child’s fear of losing the only earning member of her household. Financial dependency, emotional pressure, and the instinct to protect family stability all influenced her testimony.
Read also:- J&K High Court Pulls Up Magistrate for Issuing Warrants After Cheque Bounce Settlement
“Truth cannot be abandoned merely because a vulnerable witness is forced to retract for survival,” the bench noted.
The medical report from AIIMS recorded a fresh hymenal tear and clarified that while the child changed clothes, she did not change her undergarments. That very underwear was tested and contained the accused’s DNA. The chain of custody from hospital to police station to FSL was intact and uncontested
When questioned, the accused could not explain how his DNA appeared there. His suggestion of police mishandling contradicted the hospital’s seizure records and dated entries.
Read also:- Madras High Court Defers Plea to Halt ‘Parasakthi’ Release, Seeks Report From Writers’ Body
The Court held that once these foundational facts were established, the statutory presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act were triggered. The burden shifted to the accused to disprove them-which he failed to do.
Decision
In the final order, the Court upheld the trial court’s conviction and the mandatory minimum sentence:
“The presence of unimpeached scientific evidence bridges the gap left by later hostile testimony,” the judgment concluded.
The appeal was dismissed.
The 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and fine were confirmed in full.
Case Title: Jahid vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
