The incident happened on July 4, 2014 when the girl had gone out to buy paan and did not return. The girl’s parents lodged a police complaint regarding their missing child. The police informed them the next day that their daughter had been found in a hospital in an injured state. When the parents reached there, they found that the child’s face was swollen and had bite marks on her face. The girl told her parents that she had been sexually assaulted.
The girl told the police that while she was going to the paan shop a man approached her. He then snatched her money and forcibly took her to an overgrown plot. There she said the man threw away her clothes and beat her up and then sexually assaulted her. He even tried to strangle her and threw her in the water accumulated from the rain. The girl was discovered by a woman the next day. She covered the girl in blanket and dry clothes and took her to the hospital, Times of India reported.
Even touching private parts of child with sexual intent is sufficient to construe it as sexual assault: Bombay HC
The police registered a case and began their investigation wherein they learnt that the accused had committed similar offences in the past and had gone missing. He was traced 13 days later in another state and was arrested and brought back. Under forensic odontology, his dental impression matched the bite marks on the girl’s lips. He was formally arrested on July 31.
The man’s counsel argued that since the girl could not identify the man, therefore he could not be kept in prison based solely on the findings of forensic expert. But Justice Kotwal said that even in the Nirbhaya case two of the perpetrators had been nailed based on the bite marks on the victim’s body, therefore in this case also forensic odontology report can be treated as a credible piece of evidence.