Trashigang Court acquits Doctor of rape charges

2026-03-09 - 08:55

The Trashigang Dzongkhag Court has acquitted a Doctor on the charge of rape of a child above 12 years of age, on 26th February 2026. In acquitting the doctor, the court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt the standard required under Bhutan’s Civil and Criminal Procedure Code. Key findings that informed the decision included medical evidence, DNA forensic results, psychiatric evaluation and victim’s statement. The victim underwent a medical examination approximately six hours after the complaint was filed. The medical report did not indicate recent vaginal penetration, bleeding, fresh hymenal injury, or physical trauma suggestive of struggle or self-defense on the victim’s body, and found only old hymenal tears noted as pre-existing injuries. These findings were admitted as expert evidence under the Evidence Act 2005. Forensic analysis included six samples were collected from the defendant and the victim for DNA forensic examination. Samples from the condom allegedly found at the scene did not identify DNA that matched either the victim or the defendant. Further, vaginal swabs and the victim’s underwear yielded only the victim’s DNA, with no male profile detected. Based on these findings, there was no basis to establish that the defendant committed a sexual act against the victim. The DNA and forensic evidence failed to provide either direct or circumstantial proof of rape as required under Bhutan’s Evidence Act 2005. A psychiatric evaluation was conducted by a psychiatrist and medical instructor from Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital (JDWNRH) and the report noted that the victim openly recounted her experiences, displaying signs of distress, suffering, and anger. She also reported feeling frightened when seeing hospital staff, particularly those wearing white coats, and experienced sleep disturbances due to flashbacks of the alleged rape. The report also stated that her accounts and statements remained consistent, and that her comprehension, attention, decision-making, and thinking capacity were age-appropriately intact A psychiatric assessment noted that the victim displayed psychological distress and symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress, the court however highlighted that the report did not establish that these symptoms were caused conclusively by the alleged rape or by other factors, or pre-existed. Questions over pre-existing medical conditions, including epilepsy, and the use of medications that are not exclusive indicators of PTSD further complicated the issue. Additionally, while a report from The PEMA Secretariat and Eastern Regional Referral Hospital indicated that the victim showed no memory of past events and history, this contradicted the JDWNRH psychiatric report which stated that her accounts remained consistent and that her comprehension and decision-making abilities were age-appropriately intact. The court also noted that the victim had been suffering from epilepsy for approximately four years, raising the possibility that her PTSD could have stemmed from that condition rather than from the alleged rape. Given these evidentiary gaps, the court held that there was no solid basis for conviction. So, as per the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code which states that, “where guilt beyond reasonable doubt has not been established to the Court’s satisfaction for the charge, the defendant shall be acquitted and released and have the conditions of his/her bail terminated”, the court determined that the defendant shall be acquitted of the charge of rape of a child above the age of 12 years. However, in accordance with Section 205 of the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code, the prosecution may motion the Court for new trial based on newly discovered evidence or on other grounds. Case Background And Family Account The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) charge-sheeted the case to Trashigang District Court on 18th February 2025 charging the doctor with rape of child above 12 years of age. The Royal Bhutan Police (RBP) had forwarded the case to OAG, with the probable charges of rape of a child above 12 years of age on 6th November 2024. The family of minor accused the doctor of alleged rape during a medical treatment session in Trashigang on 12th September 2024. The complaint was reported by the minor’s mother from the hospital upon which the police team along with a forensic team immediately went and conducted a medical examination. Police discovered a condom from the scene. However, the DNA tests from condom and other evidence yielded negative results. Nevertheless, the victim’s statement, together with circumstantial evidence, pointed to the suspect and led to the charge-sheet. The victim is an epilepsy patient who at the time of the alleged incident was undergoing treatment under the care of the defendant. As per the statements from the minor and her parents, she went through the sexual assault twice on two occasions in the course of treatment upon which she disclosed the incident to her mother after the second time. The minor’s parents shared that during first visit to the hospital, her father accompanied her for a checkup but was asked to leave the room by the doctor. The father shared that his daughter first told her mother that the doctor allegedly locked the door, closed the windows and raped her. During the second checkup, when his wife accompanied the daughter, she alleged that she was asked by the doctor to get free eye glasses from the hospital which she went to get as an eye patient. The daughter was with her, but the doctor took her saying her health book was with him in his office. When the mother returned, she could not find her daughter. Suspecting something was wrong, she checked the medical professional’s chamber and found it locked from inside. After knocking, her daughter eventually opened the door. Inside, the doctor acted nonchalantly, even complimenting the mother on her glasses and allegedly offering them Nu 300 for refreshments. It was then that the minor confided in her mother saying the doctor is not a good person as he raped her during the first checkup too.