The court emphasized that requests for forensic analysis must be specific and cannot be urged prematurely during ongoing prosecution evidence.

O R D E R

The order dated 08.04.2025 in Crl.M.P No.367/2024 in S.C No.465/2023 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Changanassery, dismissing the application filed by the accused therein to send the mobile phone of CW2 for analysis at the Forensic Science Laboratory, is under challenge in this petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 .

2. The facts of the case, in conspectus, are as follows:

The petitioner faces criminal prosecution for the commission of offence under Sections 376(2)(b)(f)(j), 354 and 354-A(i) I.P.C, and Section 6 r/w Section 5 (m)(n) and Section 10 r/w 9(l)(m)(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012. The prosecution case is that, on a night in the month of November, 2022, the petitioner resorted to penetrative sexual assault upon his daughter aged 8 years by inserting his finger into her vagina at the time when she was asleep. It is further alleged that, on Saturdays and Sundays, the petitioner used to come in an inebriated state and place the victim in his lap and thereafter fondle her breasts. The petitioner’s wife, who is the mother of the victim, is working abroad. The petitioner and the victim child are residing along with the petitioner’s brother and brother’s wife in a single house. On 16.05.2023, the victim child is said to have called her mother over telephone and cried. When the victim child’s mother asked her what happened, she is said to have replied that she is not able to say it to her. Thereupon, the victim child’s mother is said to have called her sister through telephone and asked her to enquire into the matter. When asked by the victim child’s mother’s sister, the victim child is said to have told her that the petitioner used to come inebriated and create ruckus, and that she is not in a position to reside in that house. The victim child is further said to have revealed to her mother’s sister that when she goes to bed, her father used to pull her along with him. Thereupon, the victim child’s mother’s sister is said to have informed the matter to the Child Welfare Committee. Upon enquiry by the Child Welfare Committee, the victim child is said to have revealed the aforesaid act of the petitioner committing penetrative sexual assault upon her by inserting his finger into her vagina while she was asleep on a day in the month of November, 2022, and the subsequent acts of the petitioner placing her in his lap and fondling her breasts. Accordingly, the matter was reported to the police, who recorded the statement of the victim child and the case was registered. During the course of investigation, the mobile phone of the victim child’s mother was handed over to the police, but it is stated that the Investigating Officer was not able to retrieve the voice messages of the victim child from it. Then the above mobile phone is said to have been released to the mother of the victim child upon her undertaking to produce it, as and when directed by the Investigating Agency. Thereafter, the mother of the victim child allegedly did not hand over her mobile phone to the Investigating Agency. The mobile phone of the victim child’s father’s brother’s wife through which the victim allegedly sent messages to her mother, is said to have been taken into custody by the Investigating Agency and forwarded to the court with the request to send it for analysis at the Forensic Science Laboratory. After the completion of the investigation, the Inspector of Police, Chingavanam laid the final report before the Special Court concerned. The trial commenced with the examination of the victim child as PW1. But, after the examination of the victim child’s mother’s sister (CW3) as PW2, the I