Delhi HC upholds conviction of man for raping minor sister

In his appeal, the convict had challenged his conviction, arguing the judgment rested on assumptions and that the victim herself had testified she was in a relationship with another man, who was responsible for her pregnancy. He also contested the reliance on a DNA report linking him to the foetus

Compassion for a family in anguish cannot justify impunity for harm done to a child, the Delhi high court has observed, while upholding the conviction of a man for repeatedly raping his 15-and-a-half-year-old sister.

The court said intra-familial abuse is often “shrouded in silence” to protect adults at the child’s expense. (Representational image)

A bench of justice Sanjeev Narula, in a verdict delivered on August 27 and released Monday, affirmed the trial court’s December 2024 order convicting the man of rape and penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act. The court also directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) to coordinate counselling for the victim and her family, and to disburse ₹13 lakh compensation awarded by the trial court.

In his appeal, the convict had challenged his conviction, arguing the judgment rested on assumptions and that the victim herself had testified she was in a relationship with another man, who was responsible for her pregnancy. He also contested the reliance on a DNA report linking him to the foetus.

During the appeal hearing, the victim and her family appeared united in requesting his release. The girl, visibly anxious, told the court that her brother was not responsible for her pregnancy.

The bench, however, held that her consent was “irrelevant” as she was a minor, and noted that she had identified the man in her earliest complaint and in her statement before a magistrate.

“Before parting, the court records what it witnessed in open court. The prosecutrix, her sister, and their parents stood together, not to press accusation, but to seek the appellant’s release. The prosecutrix… plainly fragile, spoke in a low voice, visibly anxious, her thumbs nervously twisting. Such dynamics are, sadly, not uncommon,” the court said.

It added that intra-familial abuse is often “shrouded in silence” to protect adults at the child’s expense.

“Courts cannot mend what is broken at home. The message, however, must remain unambiguous. A child’s bodily integrity is inviolable. Compassion for a family in anguish cannot translate into impunity for harm done to a child,” the court said.