Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

Lack of Paternity Does Not Conclusively Negate the Alleged Rapes on Various Occasions: Calcutta High Court Upholds Rejection of Discharge in Rape Charges

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has reiterated that a negative DNA paternity test does not conclusively prove the absence of rape, thereby upholding the decision to reject the discharge of the accused in a case involving charges under Sections 376(2)(i) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The petitioner, Rabi Das, sought discharge from a criminal case asserting that a DNA test had proven he was not the father of a child born to the alleged victim, contending his innocence and arguing false implication in the rape charge. The application for discharge was initially rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge on the grounds that paternity alone does not resolve the accusation of rape, which allegedly occurred on multiple occasions.

The High Court, led by the Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta, highlighted that while the DNA report was a significant piece of evidence, it was not conclusive in proving the absence of rape. The Court stressed the importance of considering all available evidence, which includes the testimony of the victim and medical reports, in the substantive trial phase.

Justice Gupta noted, “The allegation of rape on multiple occasions demands a thorough examination of evidence beyond the DNA report.” He further pointed out that the allegations, as detailed by the victim on various instances, required judicial scrutiny which could not be adequately addressed at the discharge stage.

The judgment emphasized the necessity of a full trial to assess all facets of the case, stating that “premature discharge on the basis of a singular scientific report would undermine the judicial process.”

Upholding the lower court’s decision, the High Court dismissed the revisional application, stating that the dismissal of the discharge request was justified and aligned with legal standards. The Court decreed that the case proceed to trial for a comprehensive evaluation of all evidence.

Conclusion: This judgment underscores the principle that while scientific evidence like DNA tests are pivotal, they must be corroborated by other forms of evidence in cases of serious allegations such as rape. The necessity for a full and fair trial to establish the truth beyond reasonable doubt remains paramount in the judicial process.

Date of Decision: 6th May 2024

Rabi Das @ Rabindra Nath Das vs. The State of West Bengal & Another

Latest Legal News