News Updates

SC Grants Bail To Octogenarian After DNA Reports Showed That He Is Not The Father Of Rape Victim's Child [Read Order]

24 Aug 2020 2:22 PM GMT
SC Grants Bail To Octogenarian After DNA Reports Showed That He Is Not The Father Of Rape Victims Child [Read Order]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Supreme Court granted bail to an octogenarian rape accused after noticing that the DNA report showed that he is not the father of the child born to the rape victim.

The man was booked under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, for allegedly raping a minor. The girl delivered a baby on 5th July. The accused was denied bail by the Calcutta High Court and had hence filed a Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court. In his SLP, he submitted that he is willing to get a DNA test done to verify that he is not responsible for the pregnancy of the daughter of the complainant girl. He submitted that his writ petition before the High Court in that regard is still pending. According to him, a false case has been lodged against him by the complainant who is his tenant and there was a dispute between them regarding non-payment of rent.

Last month, when the matter came up before the Supreme, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the man, submitted that the accused is aged 84, and he is incapable of sexual activities.He reiterated that the accused is willing to undergo DNA Test and prayed for his release from jail. The bench then directed him to undergo DNA test. 

Today, when the matter came up for further consideration, the bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ajay Rastogi, taking note of the DNA report, observed:

Learned senior counsel for the appellant has a copy of the same and both the learned counsel are ad-idem on the fact that the DNA report does not show that the appellant is a father of the child born. In view of the aforesaid, we have no hesitation in saying that the appellant should be enlarged on bail on the terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

As regards the submission that it is out of a landlord-tenant dispute that a false case has been filed and that the accused should be given appropriate compensation, the bench said that it is for the accused to take necessary steps in this behalf in accordance with law claiming compensation in accordance with law.

Case details
Case no.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.537 OF 2020
Coram:  Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ajay Rastogi
Counsel: Sr Adv Kapil Sibal, AOR Liz Mathew 

Click here to Read/Download Order

Read Order

Next Story
Share it