The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, overturned the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(f)(l) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The appellant was initially sentenced to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment by the trial court. The conviction was primarily based on the testimony of the victim and other circumstantial evidence.

However, during the appeal, it was revealed that the DNA analysis report, which was not available during the trial, did not match the accused. The High Court found that this DNA evidence, which came to light post-conviction, critically undermined the prosecution's case. The Court criticized the prosecution and investigative authorities for their failure to ensure that the DNA analysis was conducted and presented in a timely manner, leading to a miscarriage of justice.

Background:

• The case involved allegations of sexual assault on a 12-year-old minor girl, who was deaf and dumb, by her school teacher, Bhaiyya S/o Vijay Chakre.
• The victim's mother reported the incident to the police after the victim expressed reluctance to attend school and later narrated the incident to her.
• The trial court convicted the accused based on the victim's testimony and other circumstantial evidence.

Appellant's Arguments:

• The defense argued that there were inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, and the victim was possibly tutored.
• The appellant claimed false implication due to local political pressures, as the brother-in-law of the informant was a political figure with interests in a rival school.

High Court's Observations:

• The High Court noted the delay in obtaining and presenting the DNA report, which ultimately did not support the prosecution's case.
• The DNA found on the victim's clothing did not match the accused, which raised significant doubts about his involvement.
• The court criticized the prosecution for not bringing the DNA evidence to the trial court's attention in a timely manner.

Judgment:

• The High Court set aside the conviction, emphasizing the importance of forensic evidence in criminal trials, especially in cases involving severe charges like those under the POCSO Act.
• The court also highlighted the need for prompt and accurate forensic analysis in ensuring justice is served.

Conclusion:

The case underscores the critical role of forensic evidence in the judicial process and the potential for miscarriages of justice when such evidence is mishandled or delayed. The Bombay High Court's decision serves as a reminder of the importance of thorough and timely investigation in criminal cases.