Lack of sperm in rape cases does not automatically mean innocence: POCSO court

HYDERABAD: Making it clear that absence of sperm in rape cases does not automatically mean innocence, a fast-track court sentenced an accused to life imprisonment in Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO) cases, 2012.

The court’s observation on Monday came after the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) found no evidence of sexual assault against a 17-year-old survivor.

The case relates to a missing complaint registered with LB Nagar police in 2018. Four days later, police found the girl at Secunderabad Railway station. She told the police that the accused, identified as Kanakala Rajesh, took her to Visakhapatnam under false pretenses and assaulted her. The police then invoked Section 366-A, 376(2)(n) of the IPC, Section 6 and Section 5(l) of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2) of the SC and ST (POA) Penal Code Amendment. He changed his (Va). Law, 2015.

After the procedure, the police sent the girl for medical examination and the collected samples were sent to FSL.

The FSL report stated that there was no evidence of sexual intercourse.

However, in its decision, the court said that forensic evidence such as the presence of sperm is only one type of evidence, but the absence of sperm does not mean innocence. “Sperm detection is only valid if ejaculation occurs. However, not all sexual assaults involve ejaculation, and even if ejaculation does occur, there may be limited or no sperm deposition into the vagina, especially if the assault is short-lived or involves different types of sexual activity,” the court said in its decision.

The defense lawyer quoted the victim’s statement to the court that the accused came to her house four times and they had physical relations before leaving for Vishakhapatnam and said this was evidence of mutual consent.

However, the court stated that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident. “According to legal principles, minors do not have the capacity to consent to sexual intercourse. The court noted that sexual intercourse with a minor is generally classified as statutory rape.

“It is a well-established principle of law that the victim’s evidence is more than sufficient to establish the case, he is the victim and there is no need for corroboration,” the prosecution said.