Rape survivor can't perform well in school wrong assumption: courttext_fields
Mumbai: In a sexual assault case on a minor by her father, when the defence made the crude argument that the girl performed well in the exams and her father used to buy her presents and toys, a special court ruled that does not prove that the girl was not affected or her father did not assault her.
The court observed that it should not be assumed that a survivor of sexual assault at home would not be performing well in exams or behave normally otherwise, PTI reported.
The special judge of a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act court in Mumbai, Jayshri R Pulate, sentenced the accused to ten years in jail on September 29.
The accused was a worker in Saudi Arabia and came home only once in every two months. His wife, the victim's mother, noticed her daughter avoiding the man whenever he was home. The girl later told her mother that she was sexually assaulted many times by her father for seven years. She has faced the assaults since she was ten.
After the mother lodged a case against the man and the case reached court. The defence made another argument that there was a large delay in registering the complaint. However, the court observed that the girl was too young to understand what was happening to her.-
When she was in Class 9, she learnt from sex education class that she was being subjected to sexual abuse. Even then, it was natural for her to be concerned about the loss of financial support for the family if her father went to jail, the court observed.
She stated during cross-examination that she got an average of 70 per cent marks in class 9th and attended school regularly. She had also said that the accused regularly brought new clothes and toys for her and her siblings. It was then the defence argued that these facts do not square with the allegations of sexual abuse.
However, the court brushed off the argument. "It should not be assumed that the victim of sexual assault could not secure good marks in exams," the judge said.
The "normal" behaviour by the accused, such as bringing clothes and toys for his children, did not mean he would never commit the kind of heinous offences he was accused of, the court said in the ruling.