Now Reading: Gauhati HC acquits rape convict, says mental age not proof of incapacity
-
01
Gauhati HC acquits rape convict, says mental age not proof of incapacity
Gauhati HC acquits rape convict, says mental age not proof of incapacity
The Gauhati High Court has acquitted P. Rohmingsanga, convicted by a Sessions Court for raping a 24-year-old woman with intellectual disability. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma set aside the 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentence,…
The Gauhati High Court has acquitted P. Rohmingsanga, convicted by a Sessions Court for raping a 24-year-old woman with intellectual disability. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma set aside the 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentence, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove the woman lacked capacity to understand sexual intercourse or give valid consent. The court said a mental age of 8 or 9 years cannot automatically equate an adult woman with a child.
The court found that the victim's Section 164 CrPC statement could not be used as examination-in-chief because mandatory safeguards for mentally disabled witnesses were not followed. Disability certificates from 2009 and 2021 showing 40% mental disability were presented, but the doctors were not examined to explain their meaning. A clinical psychologist assessed a mental age of 8 years 8 months and IQ of 63, but did not opine on the victim's capacity to consent.
The accused admitted intercourse but claimed it was consensual. The FIR was registered on July 22, 2022, over two months after the alleged incident on May 9, 2022. The court emphasised that the question of consent must be determined by evidence on the victim's actual capacity, not merely disability percentages or psychological scores.
Indian Opinion Analysis
This case highlights a recurring legal gap in India: courts often lack binding medical guidelines to assess capacity for sexual consent in adults with intellectual disabilities. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act provides specific procedures for child witnesses, but adult victims with similar cognitive impairments fall into a grey area. The National Commission for Women has flagged this absence in multiple reports. The acquittal does not bar a fresh trial if the state gathers proper expert evidence on the victim's specific understanding of sexual acts. Mizoram's directorate of prosecution will now decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court within the 90-day limit.
Watch for: whether the state files a special leave petition before the Supreme Court, and whether Parliament or the Law Commission introduces standardised protocols for evaluating capacity in such cases.
Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com
This story was synthesised by AI from the source linked above.
