Man gets life term for raping minor stepdaughter, impregnating her

Abusive behaviour by a father, albeit a step one, in the initial stages of a girl’s life can negatively impact the way she views relationships in future, a Delhi court observed while sentencing a man to life imprisonment for the rape of his minor daughter who had given birth to his child after the assault..To ensure uninterrupted education and security towards her emotional and mental health, Additional Sessions Judge Sunil Kumar Sharma ordered a compensation of ₹10.50 lakh to be paid to her.The sentencing order, passed on May 5, underlined that the minor was subjected to the crime within the “sacred precincts” of her home..The judgment began with the lines of Pulitzer-winning author Harper Lee’s novel Go Set a Watchman that said,“She did not stand alone, but what stood behind her, the most potent moral force in her life, was the love of her father.”.The Court subsequently noted that the man had betrayed the trust and respect of the survivor, her mother and the society. Therefore, the act of repeated sexual assault on the minor “irrefutably” spoke volumes of the “depravity and proclivity” in the convict's mindset — indicating an aggravating circumstance against him.“The close relationship between the perpetrator and the survivor complicates the trauma of the incestuous act with both relational trauma and betrayal trauma,” the order further said. .The Court had wrapped up the trial in little over three years from the date of the registration of the FIR when it convicted him on December 21, 2021. The sentencing order delivered recently took note of the report regarding the impact on the survivor, and the paying capacity of the convict so that the former is adequately compensated..The case.The crime came to light when the survivor complained of stomach ache, and was taken to a nearby medical facility when she was found to be pregnant. She then confided in her mother about being subjected to rape by the step father.The police alleged that the minor was 26-weeks pregnant, as reflected from a medical report. She stated that the stepfather had raped her on multiple occasions, and threatened to kill her and her mother if she disclosed her ordeal to anyone..At that time, the medical report opined against termination of pregnancy which was over 20 weeks.The man was arrested and charged under Sections 376(2)(f) (rape by a relative) and (n) (committing rape repeatedly on same victim); 376(3) (rape on a female below sixteen); 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, besides Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act..‘Consensual relation’.The defense counsel claimed that the relationship between the survivor and the man was consensual. The court was told that, in fact, the man was not her step father, but her lover. The testimonies of the complainant and her mother were, therefore, labelled unreliable by the defense counsel..The mother was stated to have known about the survivor’s relationship with the man and her pregnancy. The girl, on the other hand, was stated to be an adult.When it came to quantum of punishment, the 36-year-old man sought leniency saying he had no previous criminal record and was a daily wager who had to fend for his ailing mother..Basis of conviction.The court established the girl’s age to be below 18 at the time of the incident from her school certificates that had her date of birth.Ruling out the other argument on the point of consent while referring to the POCSO Act and 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child, the Court held,.“Even having a love affair with the victim or having any conversation, proximity with her will not give a license to the accused to commit sexual activities with her even with her consent as consent of a child for sexual activities is immaterial.”.The Court also rejected the argument of the man being the girl’s paramour, relying on the statements of her mother and absence of any material to prove the claim.“It is pertinent to note that although, the testimony of the victim on all the vital aspect has remained intact and uncontroverted, however, minor variations, if any regarding the exact time of the alleged incident are immaterial…,’ it held..Apart from the life term for rape, the convict was saddled with a fine of ₹55,000..Additional Public Prosecutor Pankaj Ranga argued for the State.Advocates Yatender Kumar and Meenakshi Parmar appeared for the convict.Advocate Pooja Jha represented the Delhi Commission of Women.