Mumbai: In a landmark acquittal, a 56-year-old man who had spent eight years in prison for allegedly sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl with intellectual disabilities was freed on Sunday by a special POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) court in Mumbai. The court cited serious deficiencies and contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence as the basis for the verdict.

The accused, who worked as a driver, had been in custody since his arrest in 2017, following allegations that he had physically molested the teenage girl while her mother was away and her brothers were absent. The alleged incident was reported to have occurred in a slum area of Mumbai on the evening of August 23, 2017, between 8 and 8:30 pm.

Court Observations: Gaps in Evidence

Delivering the verdict, Special Judge ND Khose noted that the prosecution had failed to establish even the most basic foundational facts required to substantiate the allegations. The judge pointed to several critical gaps, including:

• Discrepancies in the girl’s age: The FIR cited the girl’s birth year as 2000, while school documents suggested 2002. Additionally, inconsistencies were noted in the names of her parents across official records. The judge ruled that without credible documentation, her exact age at the time of the alleged incident could not be verified—a crucial requirement for POCSO charges, which apply only to minors under 18.
• Questions about cognitive ability: The prosecution claimed that the girl had an IQ of 36, indicating intellectual disability, but no solid, authenticated medical evidence supported this assertion. The court found the evidence presented “scanty” and insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
• Contradictions in statements and medical evidence: The girl’s statements reportedly conflicted with the available medical records, further weakening the case.

“To my mind, the evidence adduced by the prosecution is scanty and not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If it were so, the accused is entitled to get the benefit of doubt,” Judge Khose said, according to reports.

Defense Arguments

The defense highlighted that the case appeared to stem from prior hostility between the driver and the girl’s family. They argued that he had been wrongfully implicated, with no credible proof that the girl had any mental impairment. The defense emphasized that there was no documentary record supporting claims of her intellectual disability, and medical evidence did not corroborate the prosecution’s narrative.

Impact of Age Discrepancy

A significant factor in the acquittal was the failure of the prosecution to reliably establish the girl’s age at the time of the incident. Under the POCSO Act, a key element of the charge is that the victim must be under 18. The court found the documents presented by the prosecution, including the birth certificate, to be unreliable due to inconsistencies in parent names and discrepancies across official records.

Eight Years in Custody

The man’s acquittal brings an end to eight years of incarceration, during which he maintained his innocence. The verdict underscores the judiciary’s emphasis on the principle of reasonable doubt, particularly in cases where evidence is incomplete or contradictory.

This case also highlights systemic issues in POCSO trials, where reliance on documents that are inconsistent or poorly verified can lead to prolonged detention and immense personal suffering. Legal experts note that while protecting minors from sexual offences remains paramount, careful scrutiny of evidence is equally crucial to prevent wrongful convictions.

Court Verdict and Legal Precedent

Judge Khose’s verdict reinforces the benefit of doubt principle in Indian criminal law, particularly in sensitive cases involving alleged sexual offences against minors. The decision also signals the need for meticulous documentation in cases involving age verification and cognitive assessments.

The acquittal was welcomed by the accused and his legal team, who repeatedly argued throughout the trial that the charges were unfounded. Advocates for the accused expressed relief that the court acknowledged the lack of substantial evidence and ruled in favor of the driver after nearly a decade of legal proceedings.

---