Gauhati High Court Overturns Conviction in POCSO Case Due to DNA Evidence

Abdul Hamid Acquitted of Sexual Assault Charges as DNA Test Contradicts Prosecution's Case

In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has set aside the conviction of Abdul Hamid, who was previously sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(3) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The judgment came on October 31, 2025, following an appeal challenging the decision of the Special Judge, Nagaon, Assam.

The case revolved around allegations made by the victim, Hamid's granddaughter, who claimed that Hamid had sexually assaulted her, leading to her pregnancy. The prosecution relied heavily on the victim's testimony and her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC. However, the DNA test conducted revealed that Hamid was not the father of the child, thereby contradicting the core of the prosecution's argument.

The judgment, delivered by Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Mitali Thakuria, emphasized the importance of reliable evidence in criminal convictions. They noted that while the victim's testimony is crucial, it must inspire confidence and be corroborated by substantive evidence. In this case, the DNA test significantly undermined the victim's claims, leading to the conclusion that the evidence did not support a conviction.

Further, the court highlighted the limitations of statements made under Section 164 CrPC, citing precedents from the Supreme Court which establish that such statements are not substantive evidence but can be used for corroboration or contradiction.

The defense argued that the allegations were fabricated due to property disputes between the victim's family and Hamid. The court found merit in the argument, especially given the lack of credible evidence supporting the prosecution's claims beyond the victim's testimony.

The judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice through careful scrutiny of evidence, especially in sensitive cases involving allegations under the POCSO Act.

Bottom Line:

Conviction under Section 376(3) IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act cannot be sustained if the DNA test disproves paternity and the testimony of the prosecutrix lacks credibility.

Statutory provision(s): 

• - Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376(3)
• - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 Section 6
• - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 164
• - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 Section 29
• - Evidence Act, 1872 Section 114A

Abdul Hamid v. State of Assam, (Gauhati)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2802431