Calcutta High Court Acquits Accused, Says Medical Findings Alone Insufficient to Prove Sexual Assault

Soumyadip Mullick, MP, 6 Nov 2025, Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has set aside a rape conviction, observing that medical findings alone cannot prove sexual assault in the case of a married woman unless supported by credible ocular or circumstantial evidence.

The bench of Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das held that the prosecution’s evidence was inconsistent, the investigation flawed, and the overall case “unsafe for sustaining conviction”.

The alleged incident occurred on April 26, 2012, while the complaint was lodged two days later, on April 28. The complainant — a married woman with three children — alleged that an intruder entered her single-room house at night and raped her.

Also Read – Kolkata AQI hits 219, enters ‘poor’ zone for first time since March

The trial court had convicted the accused and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The High Court, however, overturned the verdict after finding major contradictions and procedural lapses.

The court noted that the delay in filing the FIR remained unexplained beyond the complainant’s claim that she awaited her husband’s consent, though the husband himself was never examined. Neighbours she said she had informed were not produced, and witnesses who testified gave conflicting statements.

The investigating officer failed to seize the mat where the alleged act occurred, omitted to prepare a sketch map, and recovered no weapon or relevant material.

Also Read – Kolkata housing market hits record high with over 46K registrations

Medical evidence recorded rupture of the hymen and blood-stained discharge but no external injuries. The doctor clarified that such signs may also occur naturally in a married woman and cannot, in isolation, confirm forcible intercourse.

The court termed the investigation “hopelessly perfunctory” and underlined that medical opinion must be read alongside credible testimony and surrounding circumstances.

The bench found the complainant’s account improbable — she claimed to identify the assailant in a dark verandah where her children slept beside her, although his house was about thirty minutes away.

Concluding that contradictions and absence of corroboration undermined the prosecution, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the 2013 conviction, and directed that the trial record be sent back for information. No retrial was ordered.