DNA evidence not conclusive proof in rape cases: Calcutta High Court

DNA report is not a conclusive evidence to establish rape, the Calcutta High Court held on Monday while refusing to discharge a man in a rape case despite a DNA report concluding that he was not the biological father of the child born to the victim [Rabi Das @ Rabindra Nath Das vs State of West Bengal]..Single-judge Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta noted the fact that the evidence adduced by the victim-girl established a prima facie case of rape or penetrative sexual assault of the victim girl by the petitioner."The DNA analysis report cannot be said to be the conclusive evidence regarding rape and can only be used as corroborative evidence in the trial and it is not clinching evidence," the Court said.The Court noted that the DNA report from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory showed the petitioner was not the biological father of female baby but the same cannot be a ground to discharge the accused."Only on such a scientific report, the accused cannot be discharged from a case where direct evidence is apparent from the Case Diary. Allegation of rape may be proved by substantive evidence and to prove substantive evidence, leading of evidence from both the sides are essential. Accordingly, at this initial stage, the accused cannot be discharged only on the basis of scientific report i.e. DNA Report," Justice Gupta held..The Court was hearing with a revision application filed by the applicant challenging the decision of a special court designated to hear cases under the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) The special court in Purba Medinipur had, by an order passed on January 16, 2017, refused to discharge the applicant from the rape case. The applicant had heavily relied upon a DNA report which revealed that he was not the biological father of the child.However, the special court came to the conclusion that though the applicant may not be a biological father of the child, that does not necessarily mean that he has not committed rape as alleged. For this, the special court said evidence needs to be adduced from both the sides and therefore, it would be prejudicial if the accused is discharged only on the basis of DNA Report since the allegation of the victim was that the accused has committed rape forcibly on several occasions on different dates.The accused then moved the High Court..In his order, Justice Gupta noted that the parents of the victim-girl, who was only 14 years old at the relevant time, found her to be 7 months pregnant only after she fell ill. Subsequently, the girl revealed before the police that the petitioner had forcible sexual intercourse with her on several occasions and had also threatened her of dire consequences."All these facts established a prima facie case of rape or penetrative sexual assault as well as threat perception against the present petitioner. In the light of above, this Court finds the rejection of prayer for discharge of the accused person only on the ground that he is not the biological father of the female baby as per the DNA Test Report collected from CFSL, is correct, legal and valid. There is no error in jurisdiction or law. Thus, the revisional application has devoid of merits," the Court said while refusing to discharge the accused..Advocate Amal Krishna Samanta appeared for the petitioner.Advocate Bibaswan Bhattacharya represented the State..[Read Judgment]