Rape trial cannot be decided due to lapse in DNA profiling, important observation of Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said trial in the offense of rape cannot be decided by lapse in ‘DNA profiling’, especially when it involves murder case as if only such lapse in investigation would have resulted in acquittal of the offender. If so, the object of criminal justice itself will become the victim. The top court has commuted the death sentence awarded to a convict in the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl to life imprisonment with the condition that he is subject to premature release or remission before serving an actual term of up to 30 years. will not be entitled to. A bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar delivered the verdict on the appeal of the convict who had challenged the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court upholding the death sentence awarded by the trial court.

The bench noted that the counsel appearing for the convict had argued that no DNA test was conducted to link the appellant with the samples found on the body of the deceased and thus Section 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was invoked. Violation occurred. Section 53A of CrPC deals with the investigation of a person accused of rape by a doctor.

The bench, in its 84-page judgment, said, “In view of Section 53A of CrPC and the judgments referred to… Especially when the case of murder is also involved because if the offender is acquitted only because of such lapse in the investigation, then the object of criminal justice itself will become victim.’ It noted that even if there has been any such lapse in the investigation in this case, it is the duty of the court to consider whether the material and evidence available before it is sufficient and sufficient to prove the case of the prosecution. are solid.

The appellant was the cousin of the mother of the deceased girl and the incident took place in Gwalior district in September 2014. The bench, in its judgment, observed that it was clear from the grievous injuries that the appellant had tortured the girl in a “devil and gruesome manner”. The bench said that the trial court considered the question of punishment and pronounced its judgment on the same day the appellant was convicted.

It said that the appellant was 25 years old at the time of the offense having no criminal record and hailing from poor socio-economic background and having impeccable conduct inside the jail. “Therefore, keeping in view the above aspects, we do not see any reason to deny the possibility of reform and rehabilitation of the appellant,” the bench said.