IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL, JJ.
Dilesh Nishad, S/o. Narayan Nishad & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Kharsiya, Raigarh (C.G.) - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1266, 1400 of 2019
Decided On : 17-08-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 376-D - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 311 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 4 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(2)(v) – Offence of Gang Rape – Applications for conducting DNA test – Held, two appellants herein were subjected to trial for commission of offence for committing gang rape with the victim -Victim has been examined as PW-1 and she has categorically deposed commission of gang rape upon her by both appellants one by one and during her re-examination o, she deposed that due to incident of crime, she has conceived a child who took birth - It is quite vivid that baby child of victim is neither a party in instant criminal appeals nor his (baby child) status / paternity is required to be examined in these criminal appeals filed by two appellants herein, as such, ascertaining the paternity of the victim’s child is not at all required to be determined in these criminal appeals filed by appellants and directing for DNA test of the baby child of victim would violate privacy right of infant, which is a constitutionally protected right as declared - Applications rejected
ORDER :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. This order will govern the disposal of I.A.No.1/2021 that has been filed in both the appeals for direction for DNA test of the appellants herein and the victim including the victim’s newly born baby.
2. The two appellants herein were tried by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the Act of 1989’), Raigarh, for commission of offences under Section 376-D of the IPC, Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’) & Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989, date of offence being 21-1-2018. During the course of trial, after closure of the prosecution evidence, application under Section 311 of the CrPC was filed which was allowed upon which the victim was re-examined and in the statement it was brought on record that on 25-11-2018, the victim has delivered a baby (male child). During the course of trial, the appellants herein filed application for conducting DNA test of themselves, the victim and the newly born baby which was rejected by the Special Judge by order dated 1-5-2019 holding that commission of the offence of gang rape and other allied offences can be determined without directing for DNA test of the appellants and the victim/victim’s newly born baby and therefore there is no justification for directing DNA test and accordingly, the application was rejected by order dated 1-5-2019. Thereafter, after full-fledged trial, the appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 376-D of the IPC & Section 4 of the POCSO Act against which the instant criminal appeals have been filed by the two appellants herein in which also they have filed application for conducting DNA test of themselves and the victim as also the victim’s newly born baby, which this Court had earlier considered and directed that the same will be considered and decided at the time of final hearing of the appeal, which was assailed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on which their Lordships of the Supreme Court have allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 28-4-2022 and also directed to decide the application for DNA test expeditiously pursuant to which the application for DNA test is being considered on merits.
3. The victim has also been noticed and service report dated 14-7-2023 has been filed which reveals that notice has been served upon the father of the victim. But none has appeared on behalf of the victim to oppose the applications for conducting DNA test filed on behalf of the appellants.
4. Reply has been filed on behalf of the State / respondent opposing the said application stating inter alia that it is not necessary for just and proper disposal of the criminal appeal and DNA test cannot directed as a matter of course, and relied upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Goutam Kundu v. State of W.B., 1993 Cr LJ 3233 (para 26) : (1993) 3 SCC 418, as such, the applications in both the appeals deserve to be dismissed.
5. Mr. Badruddin Khan & Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, would submit that DNA test is absolutely necessary for just and proper disposal of the criminal appeals, as the trial Court has previously rejected the application for DNA test and before the appellants could challenge the order dated 1-5-2019, they were convicted by the trial Court and therefore they could not challenge that order, as such, DNA test is absolutely necessary to find out the truth and to demonstrate that the appellants are innocent and they have not committed the offence of gang rape. Learned counsel have relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in the matter of Kapil Kumar Beri v. State of Delhi (NCT of Delhi), (2019) 256 DLT 415 : (2019) 5 RCR (Criminal) 345 and the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of Ranu Thakur v. Dayashanker and others, (2015) 2 RCR (Criminal) 153 and Brig. Sukhjeet Singh (Retd.) v. The State of Uttar Prad
Kapil Kumar Beri v. State of Delhi (NCT of Delhi)
Dharam Deo Yadav v. State of U.P.
Anil @ Anthony Arikswamy Joseph v. State of Maharashtra
Ashok Kumar v. Raj Gupta and others
Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Orissa State Commission for Women
The court held that demands for DNA testing must respect privacy rights and are only permissible when directly relevant to the charges at hand.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in criminal cases involving allegations of sexual offenses and disputed paternity, DNA testing can be ordered by the court if it is deemed nec....
The court affirmed that the evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient for conviction in rape cases, and a DNA test is not necessary at an advanced trial stage, balancing this against the right to pri....
The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exposed to the ri....
Point of law: The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exp....
DNA testing is essential in rape cases to establish paternity and guilt, and the right to privacy of the accused must yield to the public interest in justice.
Point of Law : Question of production of additional evidence by the plaintiff in appeal shall arise only after piece of evidence is available and for that purpose an application has been filed by the....
Paternity of child – DNA Test is not for mere asking but can be resorted to in deserving matters only as it helps in preventing destitution, vagrancy and bastardization.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.