The court said there was no reason to doubt the truthfulness of the survivor's testimony. (AI-generated image)The Gauhati High Court recently upheld the 14-year jail term awarded to a man who had sold a minor girl to a brothel after promising to marry her, saying the absence of injury marks on the survivor doesn’t mean there was no assault.A bench of Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Sanjeev Kumar Sharma observed that the appellant lured the minor survivor by falsely promising marriage to push her into prostitution.“We find that the learned trial court has properly appreciated the evidence and that the appellants have failed to establish that the prosecution case is a fabricated case. We would also like to add that it is settled law that absence of injury marks on the body of the victim, does not mean that the victim had not been raped,” the July 14 order said.The survivor was working as a domestic help at the informant’s house, and on the pretext of going to a pharmacy, left with the appellant, who later allegedly sold her to a brothel in Siliguri, run by the co-accused. Later, the police rescued her after she had spent three days there. Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Sanjeev Kumar upheld a conviction of a man for selling a minor girl to a brothel.‘Survivor sold to brothel’Following a complaint filed on July 21, 2020, a case was registered under the IPC for Kidnapping, abducting or inducing a woman to compel her marriage. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed against both accused under various provisions of the IPC, POCSO Act and Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.Advocate S Biswas for the accused submitted that the prosecution had failed to prove that the survivor was sold for prostitution or that the co-accused woman was operating a brothel. It was argued that the prosecution did not obtain anything from the co-accused’s house.That the age of the survivor has not been proved, since the author of the birth certificate did not adduce further evidence in the court; the doctor’s evidence showed that, as per the radiological examination done upon the victim, she was 18 to 20 years old, and that there was no injury mark on the body of the victim. Story continues below this adS Sharma, amicus curiae for the survivor, submitted that she had identified the co-accused/ brothel owner and had seen her giving the appellant Rs 500 for tea. Thereafter, the appellant left, telling her that he would return by night. However, he did not return. Instead, the survivor was subjected to sexual intercourse by unknown persons. ‘No injury marks do not mean rape did not happen’The court observed that the absence of injury marks on a rape survivor’s body does not mean that rape did not occur. It held that the prosecution had established that the survivor was sold by the appellant to the brothel owner. The court held that there was no reason to doubt the truthfulness of the survivor’s testimony and, in fact, her testimony inspires the confidence of the court, and in view of the material on record observed that it implied that the survivor was subjected to sexual assault in a brothel. The court found that the appellant had lured the survivor on the false pretext of marriage before selling her for prostitution, attracting an offence under Section 366 of IPC. It added that the appellant had not been convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, but had rightly been convicted under Section 6/17, which governs the punishment for aggravated sexual assault under the POCSO Act, as he was the person who sold her to the brothel owner for prostitution. Somya Panwar works with the Legal Desk at The Indian Express, where she covers the various High Courts across the country and the Supreme Court of India. Her writing is driven by a deep interest in how law influences society, particularly in areas of gender, feminism, and women’s rights. She is especially drawn to stories that examine questions of equality, autonomy, and social justice through the lens of the courts. Her work aims to make complex legal developments accessible, contextual, and relevant to everyday readers, with a focus on explaining what court decisions mean beyond legal jargon and how they shape public life. Alongside reporting, she manages the social media presence for Indian Express Legal, where she designs and curates posts using her understanding of digital trends, audience behaviour, and visual communication. Combining legal insight with strategic content design, she works on building engagement and expanding the desk’s digital reach. Somya holds a B.A. LL.B and a Master’s degree in Journalism. Before moving fully into media, she gained experience in litigation and briefly worked in corporate, giving her reporting a strong foundation. ... Read More