Chandigarh’s shame: 10-yr-old’s rape case hits a wall, accused uncle not father of her child

Chandigarh, Sep 12: Nearly two months after a resident of Sector 37 was booked for rape of his 10-year-old niece, it is reliably learnt that he has not fathered the newborn baby girl of the victim.

Sources said the report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh, has stated that the DNA of the newborn didn’t match with the accused.

Sources in Chandigarh Police confirmed that a forensic report by the CFSL has been submitted in the court. However, HT has not independently accessed the forensic report.

The revelation gives a dramatic twist to the rape case of 10-year-old, who was 30 weeks pregnant when it came to light in July. The matter had caught national attention after a public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court seeking termination of pregnancy. The apex court constituted a medical board of experts from the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) to ascertain whether it can be terminated, but it opined against it.

The accused uncle was arrested on the day when an FIR was registered on July 14 on the complaint of the victim’s mother. The victim too had identified the accused in the court.

During trial, it had come to light that the mother initially took the girl for abortion, but doctors refused. Then she approached the police and also filed a plea for termination of pregnancy.

Recently, the apex court also directed the Chandigarh administration to give family Rs 1 lakh as interim relief. The minor gave birth to a baby girl on August 17.

A Chandigarh court had then initiated a speedy trial in the case soon after the victim delivered at Government Medical College and Hospital (GMCH), Sector 32, on August 17.

According to the victim’s statement and police investigation, she was “repeatedly raped” as her father, a government employee, remained out of the house in the day and her mother, a domestic help, also used to go for work. The accused, a security guard at a hotel in Sector 35, was usually on night duty and hence was believed to interact with the victim when neither of her parents were at home, once she was back from school.