The argument of Ms. Uttara Babbar, learned senior counsel is that no DNA test was carried out. No doubt, the DNA test was not carried out and it would have been better for the prosecution to have done the same. However, keeping the overall conspectus of the case in mind, we do not think that not conducting DNA test was fatal to the prosecution. We draw support from the judgment of this Court in Veerendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 8 SCC 668, wherein it was held as under:
“53. In view of the nature of the provision under Section 53-ACrPC and the decisions referred to, we are also of the considered view that the lapse or omission (purposeful or otherwise) to carry out DNA profiling, by itself, cannot be permitted to decide the fate of a trial for the offence of rape especially, when it is combined with the commission of the offence of murder as in case of acquittal only on account of such a flaw or defect in the investigation the cause of criminal justice would become the victim. The upshot of this discussion is that even if such a flaw had occurred in the investigation in a given case, the court has still a duty to consider whether the materials and evidence available on record before it, are enough and cogent to prove the case of the prosecution. In a case which rests on circumstantial evidence, the Court has to consider whether, despite such a lapse, the various links in the chain of circumstances form a complete chain pointing to the guilt of the accused alone in exclusion of all hypothesis of innocence in his favour.”{Para 26}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Before B.R. Gavai, Aravind Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.)
Criminal Appeal Nos. _________ of 2024
(@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 9015-9016 of 2019)
Sambhubhai Raisangbhai Padhiyar Vs State of Gujarat
Decided on December 17, 2024
Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3769,2024 INSC 987.
Read full Judgment here: Click here.
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment