Mohali, Oct. 9 -- A fast-track court has sentenced a man to 15 months of rigorous imprisonment for sexually harassing a girl,while acquitting him of kidnapping, rape and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 charges after finding that the prosecution failed to legally establish that she was a minor. Additional sessions judge Vikrant Kumar, in a judgment, observed that the victim's testimony established sexual harassment even though forensic tests did not detect semen or male DNA. The court held that a negative DNA report did not automatically discredit the victim's testimony when other evidence remained reliable. The court convicted Gobind Kumar, living as a tenant in Mataur, Mohali originally a resident of Uttar Pradesh, under Section 75 read with Section 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), although the prosecution had not originally charged him under these provisions. It sentenced him to 15 months of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a Rs.1,000 fine. In default, he will undergo another month in prison. The court also recommended compensation for the victim under the victim compensation scheme. According to the prosecution, the girl's mother left home for work on July 14, 2025, and found her daughter missing on returning around 4.30 pm. The family later learnt that Gobind allegedly kidnapped her and took her to Mataur to Uttar Pradesh. Police registered an FIR at Matour police station the next day. Police arrested Gobind on July 19 after locating him with the girl at Kargil Park in the Matour area. The victim told the court that Gobind sexually harassed her and threatened to kill her before taking her to Uttar Pradesh. The court, however, found a crucial gap in the prosecution's case, it failed to legally prove that the girl was a minor. Although school records showed her date of birth as January 1, 2014, the court said those records did not meet the requirements for age determination under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act and acquitted Gobind of offences under Sections 137(2) (kidnapping), 87 (abducting) and 65(1) (rape) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The court also noted that the victim herself denied during cross-examination that Gobind raped her. However, it accepted her account that he sexually harassed her. The court rejected the defence argument that the absence of an independent eyewitness, CCTV footage, knife recovery or positive DNA report weakened the case....