Absence of DNA or spermatozoa does not vitiate conviction if victim's testimony is corroborated by medical evidence.

The appellant’s wife lodged an FIR on 20.07.2015, alleging that the appellant repeatedly committed penetrative sexual assault on their eight-year-old daughter

The victim (PW-2) testified that the appellant inserted his penis into her vagina and mouth and bit her private parts

Medico-legal examination confirmed swelling, redness, and an old torn hymen, indicating repetitive forceful penetration

The trial court convicted the appellant on 05.04.2018 under Section 376 IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act

The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds of procedural irregularities in Section 313 Cr.P.C. examination and lack of DNA/spermatozoa corroboration

1. Whether the non-mention of Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act in the questions put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. vitiates the conviction

2. Whether the absence of spermatozoa and the failure to verify blood samples on the victim's clothing are fatal to the prosecution's case

3. Whether the offense should be downgraded to Section 9/10 of the POCSO Act (Sexual Assault) rather than Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault

The Court applied Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. regarding the examination of the accused, holding that substance of allegations takes precedence over the technical mention of sections

It relied on Veerendra v. State of M.P. (2022) and Sunil v. State of M.P. (2017), establishing that investigative flaws or the absence of DNA/pathological evidence do not mandate acquittal if other evidence is cogent

It followed Lok Mal v. State of U.P. (2025) and State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996), affirming that the testimony of a child victim, if credible, requires no corroboration

The court also interpreted Sections 5, 7, 9, and 10 of the POCSO Act to distinguish between sexual assault and penetrative sexual assault

The Court found that although the specific section numbers (5/6) were omitted in the Section 313 Cr.P.C. examination, the factual allegations constituting the offense were clearly presented to the appellant, satisfying the requirement of a fair trial

Regarding the lack of forensic corroboration, the Court noted the delay of 20-22 hours before examination and that the victim had bathed, explaining the absence of spermatozoa

The presence of blood on the underwear and the medical findings of an old torn hymen and bite marks provided sufficient corroboration to the victim's "fully credible" testimony

The Court rejected the plea to downgrade the offense to Section 9/10, noting that the evidence clearly established "penetrative" intercourse, which falls strictly under Section 5 (Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault)

It held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault against his daughter

The Court upheld the minimum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment as prescribed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, finding no grounds for reduction