Allowed

Pankaj @ Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 Oct 2022CRLMP/2424/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed Special Criminal Misc. Petition challenging Trial Court order directing DNA verification. Held DNA report necessary for emergence of truth despite lack of prosecutrix corroboration; instructed sealing of non-matching report from prosecution only.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; DNA verification ordered; instructions issued on sealing DNA report if result does not match petitioner.

Pankaj @ Rakesh Vs State of Rajasthan — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

[CRLMP-2424/2022]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S. B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 2424/2022

¶5

Pankaj @ Rakesh S/o Shri Valji, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Punjpur Fala Talaiya, P.S. Aaspur, District Dungarpur

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

Kanti Lal S/o Fula Parmar, R/o Naya Gaon Nichala, P.S. Dovada, District Dungarpur Raj.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mool Singh Bhati, P.P.

¶12

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶13

Order

¶14

14/10/2022

¶15

By way of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.04.2022 passed by the Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Cases, Dungarpur (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”), whereby the trial court has directed the blood samples of the petitioner and prosecutrix’s newly born child to be obtained for DNA verification.

¶16

By way of order dated 23.05.2022, this Court had directed the report of DNA analysis to be kept in a sealed envelop.

¶17

A Letter dated 27.07.2022 written by the trial court addressed to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court has been placed on record. Accordingly, the report of DNA analysis has been received and same has been kept in a sealed envelop.

¶18

In the opinion of this Court, report of DNA sample of the child and its comparison with petitioner’s DNA sample, upon whom

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CRLMP-2424/2022]

¶21

the allegations of sexual assault on a minor girl have been levelled, may be necessary for the purpose of determining the petitioner’s involvement (if any) in sexual assault.

¶22

If the sample of newly born child matches with the petitioner, it would greatly help the prosecution case, particularly when the prosecutrix has not supported the case of the prosecution during her cross-examination.

¶23

In case, the DNA sample does not match with the petitioner, the trial court shall consider the petitioner’s defence, however, without disclosing the report of DNA analysis to any other person.

¶24

Needless to observe that the petitioner will be permitted to raise all arguments on the veracity and legality of the DNA report.

¶25

With the observations aforesaid, the petition is disposed of.

¶26

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶28

358-Inder/-

Pankaj @ Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj @ Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narulal @ Nariya Vs State

Khuswant @ Kushwant Vs State

Yogesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkishan Karnani Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Laxmi Vs State of Rajasthan

Ghanshyam Vs State of Rajasthan