Surendra Nath Mukerji vs Emperor on 15 April, 1918
9. The appellant is entitled to say that if a medical examination of the vital or the material parts of his body had been conducted, he would have been in a position to show that the condition of those parts "negatived the possibility of recent complete penetration" or "proved that there was no penetration." The learned Government Advocate, however, argues that, as the medical examination had taken place more than twenty-four hours after the occurrence, the result would have been inconclusive be cause in Modi's Medical Jurisprudence it is made plain that "the smegma accumulates if no bath is taken for twenty-four hours." This is no answer to the plea of the accused. It was the duty of the prosecution, if, according to the medical jurisprudence, medical examination was capable of yielding conclusive results, to ensure that examination1 within a period of time when conclusive results could be achieved. Speaking in a case of a very similar character in Surendra Nath v. Emperor ('18) 5 A.I.R. 1918 All. 160, Piggott J. has observed that: