Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012 and its 2019 amendment, which provision specifically addresses situations where a child discloses sexual abuse but there is no physical or forensic evidence?

• A The case must be dismissed if no forensic evidence is found within 72 hours
• B Section 29 — presumption of guilt: once penetrative sexual assault is proven to have occurred, the burden shifts to the accused to prove innocence ✓
• C The child's statement alone is inadmissible; corroborating evidence is mandatory
• D A medical examination finding of intact hymen completely disproves penetrative sexual assault

Explanation

POCSO Act Section 29 creates a statutory presumption of culpability: if it is established that the accused committed or abetted the commission of a sexual offence, the Special Court shall presume that the accused did so until the contrary is proved. This shifts the burden of proof to the accused. Additionally, Section 38 allows the child's statement (Section 164 CrPC statement/BNSS equivalent) to be treated as substantive evidence. Critically, medical findings are NOT required for prosecution — the child's testimony is primary evidence. An intact hymen (D) does NOT rule out penetrative sexual assault as the hymen is elastic and may not sustain injury even with penetration, particularly in repeated abuse.

Reference: The Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology (Narayan Reddy), 34th ed.

High-yield for: NEET PGINI-CETNExTFMGEUSMLEPLABMRCP

Written and medically reviewed by the StethoPrep medical team.