: A court here has upheld a judgment to keep a juvenile at a special home for two years for sodomising a 10-year-old boy, despite the fact that the prosecution failed to collect forensic evidence (lifting of semen to match it with the DNA of the juvenile).
“Forensic evidence in sexual assault cases is only a piece of corroborative evidence, and if the testimony of victim is found truthful and trustworthy even in the absence of any medical evidence, the accused can be convicted. In the present case as well, the testimony of the victim has been found truthful, and the lack of forensic evidence does not dent the testimonies of the witnesses,’’ Additional Sessions Judge Gautam Manan said.
The juvenile along with an adult accused had sodomised the boy in an open field in outer Delhi’s Bawana in 2014.
Appeal dismissed
The court, while dismissing the appeal of the juvenile, against a Juvenile Justice Board’s order by which he was sent to a special home for two years, relied on the victim’s testimony.
“The court has over the years attributed the testimonies of child witnesses to the same kind of credibility that it attaches to the statements of any other witnesses. In the present case, the victim is consistent on the material particulars with regard to the incident of sexual assault on him,’’ the judge said.
“ A ccordingly, the order convicting the appellant is upheld,’’ the judge added.
