Rape | DNA Report Inadmissible Without Examining Scientific Expert Who Conducted Test: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of a man in a rape case while observing that the prosecution did not examine the expert who conducted the DNA profiling test and in absence of such testimony the report was inadmissible in evidence. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 263]
The court was hearing State's appeal against trial court order acquitting the respondent of charges under Sections 64(2)(m) (Rape under False Promise or Deceit) and 89(Causing Miscarriage Without Woman's Consent) BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act.
A division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice RT Vachhani in its order after examining the evidence noted that the girl was in a relationship with the respondent for the last two years from the date of offence i.e. 24.03.2025.
She had narrated the factum of her relationship with the respondent but she had denied that the respondent maintained physical relations with her and had also denied that she was impregnated by him and that at his instance, the act of miscarriage was committed.
The court noted that the girl had been declared hostile and during her cross-examination she did not support the prosecution's case.
"Admittedly, the prosecution has not examined the person who has done the DNA Profiling Test. The report of DNA has been exhibited in the deposition of the I.O. It is settled position of law that DNA Profiling Report is inadmissible in evidence if the Scientific Expert who conducted the examination is not produced and examined by the prosecution in court. Mere exhibition of the report through the Investigating Officer is insufficient, as the reliability of the technics applied and the integrity of the findings must be established through expert testimony (Rahul vs. State of Dehli [(2023) 1 SCC 83].
Thus, therefore, if the prosecution case is examined on the principle of circumstantial evidence, then, the relevant and important scientific evidence has not been proved in accordance with law. Except DNA Analysis Report, nothing on record to prove the involvement of the accused in the crime," the court said.
The victim did not admit the contents of her statement recorded by the Magistrate under Section 183 of BNSS, the court noted.
It said that merely because the accused and victim had an affair, does not further prove that the victim got pregnant on account of repeated sexual intercourse committed upon her by the accused.
The court upheld the trial court's order which had observed that prosecution had failed to establish that the accused committed repeated penetrative sexual assault and the act of miscarriage on the girl as alleged.
The prosecution alleged that the minor girl, aged about 17 years and 10 months, was sexually abused by the respondent repeatedly for over two years. As a result, she became pregnant and to abort the fetus, the respondent gave her medicine which had caused a miscarriage.
When the girl started bleeding profusely, her parents took her to the local health centre on 24.03.2025where she revealed about the alleged relationship with the respondent, pursuant to which FIR was lodged.
During the investigation, the I.O. had arrested the accused, sent both the accused and victim for medical examination, obtained necessary samples for DNA Analysis Report, recorded the statements of the witnesses, sent the girl before the Judicial Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. (Section 164 Cr.P.C.).
Trial court acquitted the respondent on the ground that, the victim had not supported to the case of the prosecution and as such and that there was no acceptable and admissible evidence led by the prosecution to prove the charges against the respondent beyond reasonable doubt.
The findings of acquittal arrived at by the trial court are based on the evidence on record and the view taken by the trial court is reasonable and possible view," the court said.
Finding no perversity in the acquittal order the court dismissed State's appeal.
Case title: STATE OF GUJARAT v/s RASIKBHAI @ KAUSHIKBHAI HAVSINGBHAI GARASIYA
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1231 of 2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 263