Opinion Missing birth certificates
With no proof of victims age,crimes against minor girls often go unpunished
With no proof of victims age,crimes against minor girls often go unpunished
The low conviction rate for crimes against women is generally attributed to shoddy police investigation. Unsolicited statements by non-experts,vehemently criticising the police,can be read every morning in the newspapers. But factors that impact conviction,like an illiterate victim,a delay in the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) examination,a victim turning hostile,an ignorant deposition by doctors,poor research efforts by the forensic medical fraternity,ad hoc tenure of advocates,non-accountability of prosecution etc,fail to grab the headlines. Despite a slew of such reasons,the police are viewed as the only agency to be blamed for not securing a conviction.
While societys mindset is still largely traditional,girls do elope with their boyfriends who promise marriage. After a few days,either because their parents refuse to accept the couple or to protect the family honour,a case of kidnapping and rape is registered against the boy. Many victims in such cases are minor girls whose consent has no evidential value in law. Since evidence of recent intercourse,on account of delayed reporting,and signs of resistance,because of consent (howsoever invalid),are not available,determining age becomes very crucial for securing conviction in cases of minor victims.
Registration of births and deaths has been mandatory in our country since 1969; yet its enforcement is very poor because of lack of awareness,particularly in rural areas. Not doing so attracts only a paltry fine of Rs 50. Actually,the purpose of the statute is largely advisory and not punitive. The first occasion when a birth certificate needs to be produced is at the time of admission into a school; it is never required if formal education is not received and rarely noted down if the child is born at home in a village. In the absence of proof of exact age,the most natural date of birth becomes the minimum age of admission in the school on a particular date. One can see many with a similar birth date,a typical date,particularly in the educational institutions.
But such certificates do not suffice for investigation purposes,and medico-legal examination becomes important for cases of kidnapping of a minor (girl under 18 years) from lawful guardianship and rape (of a girl under 16 years) where consent of the victim is immaterial. The burden of proving the girls age is on the prosecution. In the absence of a true birth certificate,the police have to rely on the findings of a radiologist,which depend on the ossification of certain bones. But this method of determining age gives only an average age because the ossification of bones varies with climatic conditions,diet and heredity. The factor of average age is used by defence lawyers and a margin of two years is added on either side,as an accepted rule,to the age determined by the doctor. Doctors who do not keep pace with judicial pronouncements on the issue fail to defend their findings in a court of law. The prosecution,if not very thorough and up to date on medical jurisprudence,fails to take a firm view in lower courts. Thus,a girl of 13 or 14 is proved a major,the accused gets the benefit of doubt and is acquitted.
Jaising P. Modis Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology is a popular book among doctors,forensic scientists,lawyers and police officers. It contains a table on peoples age,based on the appearance and fusion of some of the epiphyses (end of long bones). However,because of regional variations,it cannot be expected to formulate a uniform standard for the determination of age for the whole of India. After allowing for a margin of six months on either side,an approximate age can be calculated after considering the physical characteristics,secondary sex characteristics and ossification tests.
The Supreme Court,ruling on a case of minor rape (State of Uttar Pradesh vs Chhotey Lal (2011) 2 SCC 550),held that there is no such rule,much less an absolute one,that two years have to be added to age determined by a doctor. In this particular case,the victim in her statement before the judicial magistrate stated that her age was 13 at the time of incident. However,a doctor,on the basis of an X-ray and physical examination,opined that she was about 17. Adding two years to that age; a high court had concluded that her age could even be 19. The victim,like many in our country,had not received any formal education. In the absence of any documentary evidence,medical evidence had acquired much importance.
Structural and cultural violence continues to haunt illiterate women in our tradition-ridden society. No one wants to delve deeper into such issues. In such a scenario,where many agencies are involved in investigations,and victims are illiterate and ignorant of their duties,is it justifiable to hold only the police responsible for low conviction rates?
The writer is inspector-general of police in Chhattisgarh,express@expressindia.com
Share
