ORDER :

SATYEN VAIDYA J.

1. This is a State appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 02.05.2019, passed by learned Special Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No. 07 of 2018. Respondents herein were charged under Sections 376(2) D, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) and have been acquitted after the trial. The victim is none other than daughter of respondent No.1 and step sister of respondent No.2.

2. During pendency of the appeal, applicant/appellant has filed an application under Section 391, 311 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for following reliefs:

" It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of the reasons stated above the present application may kindly be allowed and Annexure A/1, DNA report may kindly be taken on record and the case may be remanded back to the Ld. Trial Court for fresh decision after perusing the DNA report and the investigating agency may also be permitted to file fresh supplementary charge sheet under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C in the interest of justice and justice be done."

3. It is stated in the application that the victim at the time of registration of case was pregnant. The pregnancy eventually was medically terminated. Sample products of conception were preserved for the purposes of DNA matching. During investigation the blood samples of victim and non-applicants/respondents were also obtained and preserved. All these samples were sent to State Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga (SFSL) on 20.11.2017. Report of DNA profiling is stated to have been received by the police from SFSL on 01.07.2019. The date of preparation of such report is stated to be 22.06.2019. A copy of the DNA report has been placed on record as Annexure A/1. The contention of the applicant appellant is that due to the reason of delay in submission of SFSL report in respect of DNA profiling, the same could not be placed and proved on record during the trial. According to the applicant/appellant, the SFSL report in respect of DNA profiling is an important piece of evidence in the case, without which, the interest of justice is likely to suffer adversely. It has further been submitted that SFSL report Annexure A/1 incriminates non-applicant/respondent No.1.

4. In response, it has been submitted on behalf of the non-applicants/respondents that the victim was a psychiatric patient and was taking medicines for this purpose. The victim used to leave her house without consent of her parents. It has also been asserted that none of the prosecution witnesses including victim had deposed against the non-applicants/respondents during the trial. The DNA report, Annexure A/1 is said to be fabricated and highly suspicious, having seen the light of the day after a long period of alleged collection of samples. It has further been submitted that keeping in view the conduct of the victim, before and after the trial, it cannot be said that she will suffer in absence of the SFSL report sought to be placed on record. It has been contended that the non-applicants/respondents shall be seriously prejudiced if the application is allowed.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the records.

6. Record reveals that Dr. Arti Chauhan, PW-5, had taken sample products of conception for DNA and had handed over the same to the police. Blood samples of non-applicants/respondents were obtained by Dr. B.S. Rana, PW-7, on FTA Cards and were submitted to the police. All these samples were deposited in police “Malkhana”. On 20.11.2017, the above noticed samples were handed over to Constable Rajiv Kumar vide R.C. No. 162 of 2017 for being deposited at SFSL, Junga. The said witness ( PW-19) deposited the samples for DNA profiling at SFSL, Junga, on 20.11.2017. It is pertinent to notice that the case had been registered vide FIR No. 100 of 2017 on 09.11.2017.

7. Perusal of Annexure A/1 i.e. copy of report of DNA profiling prepared by SFSL, Junga, reveals that th