Chandigarh 10-year-old’s rape: ‘Accused uncle’s DNA doesn’t match newborn’
The accused uncle was arrested on July 14, when an FIR was registered on the complaint of the victim’s mother. The victim too had identified the accused in the court.Updated: Sep 13, 2017 12:04 IST
The lawyer of the man accused of raping his 10-year-old niece confirmed on Tuesday that his client’s DNA did not match that of the baby born to the rape victim. The DNA test result gives a dramatic twist to the case, which came to light when the victim was 30 weeks pregnant. The matter had caught national attention after a public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court, seeking termination of her pregnancy.
The lawyer, Manjeet Singh, was speaking to the media after the hearing in a city court on Tuesday afternoon. “At this moment, I can only say that the DNA of the accused does not match that of the newborn,” Singh said.
Hindustan Times had on Tuesday cited a report of Central Forensic Science Laboratory(CFSL), Chandigarh, which stated that the DNA of the newborn didn’t match with that of the accused. The accused arrested for the offence is the victim’s maternal uncle.
It is learnt that the Chandigarh administration law officer has written to city SSP informing her about the development. However, when contacted, the SSP, Nilambari Vijay Jagdale, refused to comment.
The accused, a resident of Sector 37, was booked for raping his 10-year-old niece in July.
The case came to light when the victim was 30 weeks pregnant. It caught national attention after a public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court seeking termination of her pregnancy. The apex court constituted a medical board of experts from the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) to ascertain whether the foetus could be terminated. The board decided against it.
The forensic report was submitted to the trial court on Monday. The matter was taken up by the additional district and sessions judge, Poonam R Joshi, on Tuesday afternoon, and prosecution witnesses were examined. Later, the hearing was deferred.
The accused uncle was arrested on July 14, when an FIR was registered on the complaint of the victim’s mother. The victim too had identified the accused in the court.
During the trial, it had come to light that the mother initially took the girl for abortion, but doctors refused. Then she approached the police and also filed a plea for the termination of pregnancy.
Recently, the apex court had directed the Chandigarh administration to give family Rs 1 lakh as interim relief. The minor gave birth to a baby girl on August 17.
A Chandigarh court had initiated a speedy trial in the case soon after the victim delivered at Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH), Sector 32.
According to the victim’s statement and police investigation, she was “repeatedly raped” as her father, a government employee, remained out of the house in the day and her mother, a domestic help, also used to go for work. The accused, a security guard at a hotel in Sector 35, was usually on night duty and hence was believed to interact with the victim when neither of her parents were at home, once she was back from school.
First Published: Sep 12, 2017 17:56 IST