The Delhi High Court on Monday overturned the verdict of a fasttrack court, which had acquitted a man of the charge of raping a three-year-old in 2012, and pulled up the trial court for the manner in which the victim was examined. The incident had been reported in October 2012. Fifteen days later, 22-year-old Sujeet had been arrested by the Naraina police, incidentally when he was trying to kidnap another two-year-old girl. During questioning regarding the kidnapping, police said the accused had confessed to have raped the three-year-old girl. The police had found stains of the rape victim’s blood on Sujeet’s clothing. The child, who had not been able to give a proper statement to the magistrate at the time of the incident, had identified the accused in court. However, the fasttrack court for sexual offences in Dwarka observed that it was “highly improbable” that the accused had been wearing the same blood-stained clothing 15 days after the incident and dismissed the statement given by the child. It acquitted the man on the grounds that the evidence did not prove him guilty beyond doubt. On Monday, however, the High Court bench of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Mukta Gupta held that the trial court’s reasons for disbelieving the victim’s testimony were “fallacious” and convicted Sujeet. “One cannot gloss over the fact that ‘N’ was brutally raped. Obviously ‘N’ had been lured to a secluded spot, hidden from public gaze, where she was raped. The focus of the trial was not on how ‘N’ was enticed to the secluded spot. ‘N’ was not an adult, and therefore, accountable for her conduct of how she reached a secluded spot,” the High Court said. The court also expressed surprise at the questions put to the child during the recording of the initial statement under Section 164 CrPC by the magistrate. The magistrate had concluded that the child was not competent to make a statement. According to the records, the magistrate had first asked the child about her school, and then asked her if she understood the difference between truth and lie. “What surprises us is that the learned magistrate overlooked the fact that ‘N’, who was less than three years of age, would not be studying in any school,” the High Court said, adding that the magistrate took a “casual and cavalier” approach towards the victim. "It takes children longer to process words, so it is essential to give them time to think and respond to the question.," the High Court stated, citing various studies done regarding children’s understanding and communication. The court noted that UN guidelines on justice in matters involving Child Victims and Witnesses of Crime, 2005, also stated that it was not an easy task to assess the competence of a child witness and special care must be taken. The High Court has held Sujeet guilty and will hear arguments on his sentence on October 27. According to Additional Public Prosecutor Ashaa Tiwari, Sujeet is still under trial in the kidnapping case, and is presently on bail. The child is undergoing treatment and has not recovered fully from her injuries. The High Court, in its order, has also directed the health secretary, Delhi government, "to ensure that Baby ‘N’ receives the best possible medical treatment, and if necessary at a reputed private hospital for which the expenses shall be borne by the state".
