No injury or semen stain required: Jammu and Kashmir High Court sets new precedent on rape
The High Court underscored the crucial distinction between medical examinations and judicial determinations. The court stated, "Diagnosis of rape cannot be made by a doctor. The medical expert treating the rape victim can only certify about any evidence of recent sexual activity.
FollowIn a recent development, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court made a significant clarification regarding the establishment of the offence of rape. The court held that the absence of injuries on the victim's private parts or the absence of semen stains left by the accused does not negate the possibility of establishing a case of rape.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Sanjay Dhar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri, highlighted the matter. The court emphasized that a medical expert attending to a rape victim's examination can only certify the presence of evidence related to recent sexual activity. However, determining whether a rape has occurred or not remains within the jurisdiction of the courts.
52 lakh fake mobile connections closed through Sanchar Saathi Portal: Ashwini Vaishnav
The High Court underscored the crucial distinction between medical examinations and judicial determinations. The court stated, "Diagnosis of rape cannot be made by a doctor. The medical expert treating the rape victim can only certify about any evidence of recent sexual activity. Giving opinion on whether rape has taken place It is not their job. Rape is a judicial decision."
The judges clarified that the responsibility of determining whether an offence of rape has been committed falls solely on the courts. This clarification resonates with the legal principle that only the court can ascertain whether the criteria outlined under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code have been met to establish a case of rape.
In a poignant statement, the bench elucidated, "The offense of rape can be established even without causing any injury to the private parts or leaving any semen stain."
This legal pronouncement came in the context of a case involving the conviction of a man named Bodh Raj for the rape of his one-year-old granddaughter. The medical examination had revealed a torn hymen and fresh injuries on the child's private parts. Initially, the doctor's opinion leaned towards the possibility of sexual assault, though other potential scenarios were not ruled out.
Explained: Here's what happens to propulsion module of Chandrayaan-3 after separation
Among the arguments put forth in Raj's defense, his counsel highlighted the absence of a definitive opinion and the lack of semen stains as factors that cast doubt on the prosecution's case. However, the doctor later testified that the nature of the child's injuries indicated sexual assault and penetration had occurred.
Ultimately, the High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence handed down to Raj, underscoring the significance of the medical expert's assessment and the subsequent judicial determination.
In essence, this ruling reinforces the principle that the complexity of rape cases involves both medical evaluation and legal interpretation. The court's clarification resonates in its assertion that establishing rape is a matter that transcends the confines of a medical certificate and rests firmly within the realm of legal judgment.
