The Supreme Court has acquitted a man convicted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court in a 2009 case involving the alleged rape of a four-and-a-half-year-old child, ruling that the medical examination and forensic reports did not support the prosecution's version of events.
A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar set aside the High Court's 2016 judgment and restored the trial court's original order of acquittal.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the appellant was living with a man named Jaidev Sharma in Himachal Pradesh, where the two worked together. On June 28, 2009, the informant's daughter allegedly visited Sharma's house against her mother's wishes. When she returned, her mother noticed bloodstains on her clothes and, after questioning her, learnt of the alleged assault. An FIR was lodged the same evening.
The trial court, in its 2010 judgment, acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution's evidence riddled with inconsistencies and noting that the medical report showed no injury to the child. The State appealed, and in 2016, the High Court reversed the acquittal, sentencing the man to ten years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine.
Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Counsel for the appellant argued that the High Court had ignored the trial court's reasoned findings and glossed over material contradictions in the testimony. She pointed to the forensic report, which found no blood or semen on the child's clothes or on items recovered from the scene, despite the Benzidine test being conducted. The state's counsel, however, defended the conviction, arguing that the child's own testimony should not be outweighed by medical findings.
Court's Observations
The bench closely examined the medical examination conducted within twelve hours of the incident, which recorded no injury, redness, or bruising, and a final report confirming no signs of penetration. It also noted the forensic report ruled out blood or semen on the child's clothing or on the seized items from the house.
The bench observed that the High Court failed to refer to the medical reports as well as the report of the FSL while overturning the acquittal of the appellant, and that the material on record was not sufficient to hold that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The Court also flagged confusion over the alleged location of the incident, with the investigating officer's account contradicting the child's own statement.
Decision
The Supreme Court held that the trial court had rightly acquitted the accused and that the High Court had erred in reversing that finding without engaging with the medical and forensic evidence.
The 2016 High Court judgment was set aside, the appellant was acquitted, and his bail bonds were cancelled.
Case Details:
Case Title: Ram Singh vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1052 of 2016
Judges: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Decision Date: August 11, 2026
