The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that mere medical proof of sexual intercourse cannot establish rape charges under the Indian Penal Code or POCSO Act unless there is direct or circumstantial evidence connecting the accused to the act.
Justice Sanjay Dhar, while hearing a petition by Basit Bashir, observed that the prosecution had failed to show any such connection. The medical report may confirm that sexual activity occurred, but without oral or forensic proof against the accused, charges cannot be sustained.
“The prosecution's case collapses in the absence of any oral or scientific evidence connecting the petitioner to the alleged sexual assault,”
— Justice Sanjay Dhar
Read Also:- Second Wife Entitled to Compassionate Appointment as Nominee: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Background of the Case
The case arose when a man lodged an FIR alleging his 14-year-old daughter and her minor friend had gone missing. After returning home the next day, medical tests confirmed they had engaged in sexual activity.
Police accused Basit Bashir of kidnapping and assaulting them under Sections 363 and 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The Special POCSO Judge framed charges in March 2022. Bashir challenged the order in the High Court, claiming no evidence connected him to the crime.
Justice Dhar reviewed statements given by the two minor girls under Section 164 of CrPC. Both clearly stated they had gone out on their own and accepted a lift from Bashir only because no other transport was available. They denied any force, inducement, or promise from the accused.
“The girls boarded the vehicle of their own volition, uninfluenced by any promise or allurement from the petitioner,”
— High Court noted
Read Also:- Punjab & Haryana High Court Flags SOP Ignorance as Key Cause Behind Flood of Runaway Couple Petitions
Family members also confirmed that the girls left voluntarily. No one testified that Bashir kidnapped or forced the girls to accompany him.
Though doctors confirmed recent sexual activity, no spermatozoa were found, and no DNA or other forensic links tied Bashir to the act. The victims never accused him of any assault in their recorded statements.
“Merely on the basis of the opinion of the doctor that the two girls had been subjected to sexual intercourse... it cannot be inferred that the petitioner was the author,”
— Justice Dhar stated
Legal Precedents Cited
The Court referred to Supreme Court decisions like:
- Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal
- Dilawar Balu Kurane v. State of Maharashtra
- Sajjan Kumar v. CBI
Final Verdict
The High Court concluded that no prima facie case had been made out against Bashir and that the Special Judge erred by framing charges without proper evaluation.
“Even if the material collected by the Investigating Agency remains unrebutted... it is not sufficient to presume that the petitioner has committed any offence,”
— Justice Sanjay Dhar
The order framing charges was set aside, Bashir was discharged, and the case against him was dismissed.
Case Title:Basit Bashir Vs UT of J&K
