A magistrate court in Bengaluru has acquitted an IIT Bombay research scholar accused by his estranged wife of subjecting her to cruelty and forcing her into non-consensual unnatural sex before and after
their marriage, citing inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case, lack of corroborative evidence and major lapses in the investigation.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Girish Chatni, in an order passed on May 15, cleared the accused of all charges framed under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as the Information Technology Act, as reported by The Indian Express.
The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.
Court Finds Lack Of Evidence And Contradictions
In its order, the court observed that the prosecution failed to establish key ingredients required to sustain charges under IPC Section 377, which criminalised unnatural sexual acts at the time of the alleged incidents.
The judge noted that the evidence presented suffered from substantial inconsistencies, delays and the absence of medical, forensic or independent corroboration.
According to the order, the prosecution failed to conclusively establish penetration or lack of consent. The court further stated that the evidence was marked by delayed reporting, embellishments, lack of independent witnesses and an investigation that did not demonstrate sufficient independent application of mind.
The court also observed that discrepancies existed between the woman’s statements made before the police and her later testimony before the magistrate.
Relationship Began During IIT Bombay Tenure
According to the complaint, the woman and the accused developed a relationship while pursuing research studies at IIT Bombay before marrying in 2015.
In a complaint filed in 2017, the woman alleged that her husband had subjected her to abusive behaviour, used offensive language and forced her into unnatural sexual acts after marriage. It was also alleged that private photographs of the woman had been shared with her father and friends on Facebook and WhatsApp without her consent during her absence. The images were later reportedly deleted.
A zero FIR was initially registered in Chhattisgarh in 2017 before being transferred to Bengaluru’s Viveknagar police station.
In 2019, police filed a chargesheet only under IPC Section 498A related to cruelty by husband or relatives.
Later, the woman approached the Karnataka HC seeking a reinvestigation into the matter. In 2022, the High Court directed the police to conduct a fresh probe.
Following reinvestigation, an additional chargesheet was filed invoking IPC Sections 498A, 377 and 201, along with Sections 67 and 66(E) of the Information Technology Act. During trial proceedings, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses.
Court Questions Medical And Forensic Gaps
The magistrate court underlined that no contemporaneous medical consultation or treatment records from 2015 were placed before the court despite allegations of repeated painful acts.
A medical examination reportedly conducted in 2017 did not yield a conclusive opinion regarding anal intercourse.
The court further noted that no hospital records, prescriptions, clinical examinations or treatment documents from the period of the alleged incidents were produced as evidence.
According to the order, no forensic or scientific evidence linking the accused to the alleged acts was presented during trial.
The court pointed out that no bedding, clothing or biological samples from the relevant period had been seized or analysed. No forensic laboratory reports, CCTV footage from IIT Bombay, institutional records or electronic evidence were produced before the court connecting the accused to the alleged incidents
Delay In Complaint And Medical Examination Highlighted
The court also took note of the nearly three-year delay in filing the complaint.
According to the order, no complaint had been lodged during the couple’s cohabitation or immediately after their separation in 2016. The zero FIR was eventually filed in March 2017 after restitution proceedings had reportedly been initiated the previous month.
The court observed that such delay became a relevant factor while assessing the possibility of embellishment or exaggeration in the allegations. It also criticised the delay in conducting the complainant’s medical examination, which reportedly took place eight days after the initiation of proceedings.
The court termed the delay a “lost evidentiary window” attributable to shortcomings in the investigation and held that the resulting absence of medical confirmation could not be treated as neutral against the accused.
Probe Found Procedurally Deficient
The court further identified procedural deficiencies in the police investigation.
According to the order, statements from neighbours were not recorded despite allegations that repeated incidents had occurred in a residential setting.
The judge observed that merely claiming the alleged acts occurred within the privacy of a matrimonial bedroom could not shift the burden of proof onto the accused.
Supportive testimony provided by the woman’s father regarding allegations of cruelty was also not accepted by the court.
Additionally, the court observed that the investigating officer had not independently examined whether the legal ingredients required to establish an offence under IPC Section 498A had been fulfilled.
No Proof Of Evidence Destruction, Says Court
Regarding allegations that electronic evidence had been deleted, the court held that no fresh forensic material, deletion logs, expert reports or recovery trails had been placed on record to independently establish destruction of evidence.
The court observed that the prosecution was unable to establish beyond reasonable doubt that any identifiable evidence existed at a particular time or that the accused had deliberately caused such evidence to disappear.
With these observations, the court acquitted the accused of all charges.
