Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
G. S. AHLUWALIA, J.
HARSH GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. and others – Respondent
W. P. No. 5428 of 2019
Decided On : 15-03-2019
DNA Test - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 438, Section 173(8), Section 53-A - The court discussed the purpose and significance of DNA profiling in criminal investigations, the admissibility of DNA evidence, and the statutory provisions empowering the Investigating Officer to issue a notice for conducting a DNA test. The court also highlighted the Supreme Court's observations on the legitimacy of a child and the right to privacy in the context of DNA testing.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged a notice seeking his cooperation in conducting a DNA test in a case where his wife alleged unnatural sexual act. The petitioner contended that the test would be futile, while the State argued that the test was necessary based on forensic evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the DNA test could be conducted as human sperm was found in the prosecutrix's slide, and it could provide evidence in favor of the petitioner. The court also emphasized the statutory obligation of the police to investigate and the prerogative of the Investigating Officer in determining the manner of investigation.
Issues: The issues revolved around the necessity and admissibility of conducting a DNA test in a case involving allegations of unnatural sexual act, and the petitioner's objection to the notice issued by the police authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the significance of DNA profiling in criminal investigations, the admissibility of DNA evidence, and the statutory provisions empowering the Investigating Officer to issue a notice for conducting a DNA test. The court also highlighted the Supreme Court's observations on the legitimacy of a child and the right to privacy in the context of DNA testing.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the court upheld the validity of the notice seeking the petitioner's cooperation in conducting a DNA test.
JUDGMENT :
1. Shri Ayush Chaurasiya, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri S. N. Seth, Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3/State. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the notice dated 7-2-2019 issued by the respondent No. 3 seeking co-operation of the petitioner in conducting the DNA test.
2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present petition in short that the respondent No. 4, the wife of the petitioner has lodged a FIR in Crime No. 954/2017 at police Station Dabra, District Gwalior. The application of the petitioner under section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was rejected, against which he had filed a SLP before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court by order dated 22-3-2018 passed in SLP (Criminal) No. 2264/2018 had observed as under :—
3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid interim order has been made absolute by the Supreme Court. It is submitted that although the police has filed the charge-sheet against other co-accused persons but the investigation against the present petitioner is still pending under section 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code. Since the wife of the petitioner in her statement under section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code has alleged unnatural sexual act by the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner has been served with an impugned notice dated 7-2-2019 by the Investigating Officer, mentioning that in view of the FSL report, it is essential to conduct the DNA test and, therefore, he has been directed to appear before the Investigating Officer so that the proceeding for conducting the DNA test can be conducted.
4. Challenging the notice issued by the police authorities, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that conducting the DNA test after a long time would not fetch any result and thus it is a futile attempt on the part of the police authorities. To buttress his contention, the counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order dated 17-1-2019 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sattar Khan and ors. vs. State of M.P. and anr. passed in M.Cr.C. No. 47270/2018.
5. Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the wife of the petitioner has alleged unnatural sexual act by the petitioner. The slide of the wife of the petitioner was prepared and it was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory and as per the report received from Forensic Science Laboratory, the human sperms were found in the slide. Thus, it is clear that the allegations of unnatural act are prima facie supported by a scientific evidence. Whether the human sperms are of the present petitioner or not can only be ascertained by holding the DNA test. It is submitted that at the time of medical examination of the prosecutrix i.e. on 30-12-2017 two slides from anal of the prosecutrix were prepared which were found having human sperms.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. DNA profile is the purpose of determining an individual’s DNA characteristics, which are as unique as fingerprints. DNA profiling is a forensic technique in criminal investigations comparing criminal suspects’ profiles of DNA evidence so as to assess the likelihood of their involvement in the crime. It is also used to establish immigration eligibility and in genealogical and medical research. Using PCR technology, DNA analysis is widely applied to determine genetic family relationships such as paternity, maternity, siblingship and other kinships. As per researchers, a human DNA has three billion base pairs. The half life of DNA is 521 years. A DNA profile can be extracted from a sperm. Thus in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that when a human sperm was found in the slide prepared from anal of the prosecutrix, then the DNA test can be conducted. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the consi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
