Can a DNA report be used to prove absence of consent? Delhi High Court says no, acquits rape convict
The Delhi High Court acquitted a man convicted of rape, ruling that a DNA report proving paternity does not establish the absence of consent. The court noted inconsistencies in the woman’s testimony, lack of medical or forensic evidence, and an unexplained delay in filing the FIR.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has acquitted a man convicted of rape and sentenced to 10 years in prison, ruling that a DNA report confirming paternity of the victim’s child does not, by itself, establish the absence of consent. Justice Amit Mahajan, in a verdict dated March 20, observed that while the DNA report confirmed the accused was the biological father of the child, pregnancy alone was "insufficient" to prove rape unless it was established that the act was non-consensual.
"The DNA report merely proves paternity—it does not and cannot, by itself, establish the absence of consent. The offence under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC hinges on the absence of consent," the court stated. It further noted that inconsistencies in the woman’s testimony and the absence of medical or forensic evidence made the prosecution’s case "highly improbable."
The court pointed out that the FIR was filed belatedly, with no explanation for the delay, and suggested that the allegations may have stemmed from social pressure. "The possibility that the allegations were made to retrospectively reframe a consensual relationship as rape, in order to shield the prosecutrix and her family from societal backlash, cannot be ruled out," the judge stated.
Delay in FIR, no evidence of coercion
The verdict emphasized that the woman, an adult and educated individual living with her family, had not provided a reason for not approaching authorities sooner. It also noted that she had continued visiting the accused’s home over an extended period, ostensibly to play Ludo, and had even developed an affection for him.
The court found no medical evidence of force or resistance and cited inconsistencies in the woman’s narrative that weakened her credibility. "The conduct of the prosecutrix is incompatible with the narrative of coercion, and the delay is wholly unexplained," it said.
Background of the case
The woman alleged that her neighbor raped her multiple times after inviting her to his house on the pretext of playing Ludo, with the last incident occurring in October or November 2017. She later discovered she was pregnant and filed an FIR in January 2018. A trial court convicted the accused in December 2022, sentencing him to 10 years in prison. Challenging the conviction, the accused argued that the relationship was consensual. The High Court, after reviewing the evidence, granted him the benefit of the doubt and overturned the trial court’s ruling.
(Based on PTI inputs)