Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

“DNA Profiling Cannot Be Ordered as a Matter of Course”: Chhattisgarh High Court Rejects Applications for DNA Test in Gang Rape Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, has rejected applications for a DNA test filed by the appellants in criminal appeals concerning their conviction for gang rape. The judgment was delivered by Hon’ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon’ble Shri Radhakishan Agrawal, JJ., on 17/08/2023.

The appellants were tried and convicted for offenses under Section 376-D of the IPC, Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. During the trial, they sought a DNA test of themselves, the victim, and the victim’s newly born baby, which was rejected by the Special Judge.

In their judgment, the High Court observed that “DNA profiling is a valid and reliable method for identification, but it cannot be ordered as a matter of course.” The Court further emphasized that “a direction to use DNA profiling to determine paternity is an extremely delicate and sensitive aspect and must be conducted only when eminently needed.”

The Court also noted that the baby child of the victim was neither a party in the criminal appeals nor was the paternity required to be examined. Directing a DNA test would violate the privacy right of the infant, which is a constitutionally protected right.

In conclusion, the High Court found no merit in the applications for a DNA test and rejected them accordingly. The judgment has set a precedent by emphasizing the importance of privacy rights and the careful consideration required before ordering DNA tests in legal proceedings.

 

Date of Decision: 17/08/2023

Dilesh Nishad vs State of Chhattisgarh

 

Latest Legal News