Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Monday, November 25, 2024

Merely Because DNA Report Does Not Establish Paternity Is No Ground For Release On Bail : Bombay HC Rejects Plea Of Accused In Gangrape Of Minor

Posted in: Criminal Law
Tue, Aug 4, 20, 11:37, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3728
Vaibhav Bhanudas Ubale v/s Maharashtra merely because the DNA report of a child born after a gang rape does not establish paternity of the accused, it does not mean that the accused can be released on bail.

In a well-balanced, well-analysed, well-worded and well-reasoned judgment delivered by a woman Judge named Justice Bharati Dangre of the Bombay High Court in a latest, landmark and laudable judgment titled Vaibhav Bhanudas Ubale Vs The State of Maharashtra in LD VC Dist Bail Application No. 34 of 2020 delivered just recently on July 24, 2020 has very rightly held that merely because the DNA report of a child born after a gang rape does not establish paternity of the accused, it does not mean that the accused can be released on bail. She thus rejected the bail application filed by one Vaibhav Ubale who is accused of raping a minor girl along with two others. A heinous and ghastly offence like gang rape cannot be taken lightly under any circumstances!

To start with, the ball is set rolling in para 1 where it is first and foremost observed that:
The applicant has been arrested in relation to FIR No. 194 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3, 4, 5(G), 5(J)(II), 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short POCSO Act). On investigation, charge-sheet vide no. 60 of 2019 has been filed in the Court of District and Special Judge, Pune on 25th September 2019. The accused has been charged under Section 376(d) of IPC along with two other accused persons and also the relevant provisions of the POCSO Act.

As it turned out, it is then mentioned in this same para 1 ahead about the applicant's defence that:
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant has been roped into the said offence without any rhyme and reason. The counsel placed heavy reliance on the DNA report of the child born out of the alleged act of sexual assault which do not trace the applicant as the father of the baby girl. The DNA report according to the learned counsel, sufficiently absolve the applicant of the act of sexual assault on the prosecutrix and since the charge-sheet is now filed, according to the applicant, a case is made out for grant of bail.

To put things in perspective, it is then mentioned in para 2 that:
With the assistance of the learned counsel for the applicant, I have perused the charge-sheet which has been uploaded and also placed on record in physical form. The charge-sheet consists of a statement of the prosecutrix dated 9th November 2018. The said statement is elaborate one and runs into 4 pages. The said statement is recorded after the prosecutrix delivered a baby girl on 6th November 2018 and since her age at the time of the pregnancy was found to be below 18 years, the Koregaon Park Police station official had made inquiries with her mother. The statement was given by the prosecutrix in presence of her mother and member of the Women Vigilance Committee, Gulshan Arif Shaikh.

While dwelling on the background and facts, it is then enunciated in para 3 that:
The prosecutrix had narrated her woes and stated that she and her mother were residing separately from her father on account of the frequent fights between the couple. Her mother was incurring the expenditure of the household by doing petty household work in the nearby area. The prosecutrix was pursuing her education in Morris High School Wadgaon Sheri when she was acquainted with one girl Shraddha. She happened to meet her again till both took admission in the same college in XI standard. She also became acquainted with another friend Apurva and it is these two girls who have stated in their statement to the police making reference to the date on which the incident took place.

While continuing in the same vein and delving deeper, it is then stated in para 4 that:
When the prosecutrix was undergoing her 12th Board examination in February-March 2018 and while her last paper was of subject Geography and the prosecutrix with her two friends were studying together at Shraddha's house, shew as introduced to the applicant who was residing in the same locality. On the 3rd day, when she was introduced to the applicant, her friends took her to his house.

For some reason, the other two female friends left her alone in the company of the applicant and the applicant took advantage of the situation. His two male friends in a pre-planned manner arrived in his house with some drinking and eating stuff. The applicant offered the prosecutrix some drink like Thumbs up, which contained some substance which made her feel sleepy and dizzy.

The applicant asked the prosecutrix to rest in the bed-room while her friends returned. It is then alleged that the applicant and his two friends committed rape on her. The prosecutrix had narrated the entire incident in great detail which include the specification about the location of the flat of the applicant and the clandestine manner in which the three friends arrived in his flat. Pertinent to note that this description completely matches with the spot panchnama which forms part of the charge-sheet.

Be it noted, it is then observed in para 5 that, Fearing the outcome of the act, the prosecutrix did not reveal the incident or the fact that she was pregnant, to her mother. It was only when she had pain in her stomach on 5.12.2018, her mother took her to the hospital and it was revealed to her that the prosecutrix is pregnant. When the police had arrived, the prosecutrix stated that the mother and the daughter were hesitant to report the incident to police and register an offence.

However, one of the police personnel which she has described as 'Sheikh' tutored her to give a particular statement and on his instructions, she gave her first statement on 6.11.2018 where she implicated one Sony Tapkir and reported of an incident where she accompanied him in a car and where he established physical relation with her. According to the victim's statement, she gave the earlier statement on the dictate of Shri Shaikh and even told her mother of the same incident.

However, subsequently, she gave a detailed statement on 9.11.2018 in form of a supplementary statement on the basis of which FIR has been filed and charge-sheet has also been presented to the Special Court. The statement of two friends of the prosecutrix, support her version to the extent that they went to flat of the applicant but what happened inside the flat is not known to them. The prosecutrix was below 18 yrs of age at the time when the incident took place. She delivered a baby girl which has been forwarded to an orphanage and is leading her life there. The charge-sheet contain sufficient material against the applicant.

Finally and perhaps most significantly, it is then held in para 6 that:
The case against the applicant is serious one of committing gang rape by three persons and taking advantage of a situation of a poor helpless victim girl. The applicant has indulged into an act of rape. The mere fact that the DNA report do not support the paternity is not a ground to release the applicant at this stage. There is every likelihood that he will pressurize the victim girl once being released on bail. The fact that he is a young boy itself is not sufficient to release him on bail, in light of the material collected by the investigating agency against him. No case for his release on bail is made out. The application is rejected.

In conclusion, it must well be said that Justice Bharati Dangre of Bombay High Court has very rightly rejected the bail application of the applicant. Not just this, she has also very rightly given right reasons for doing so. She has rightly ruled that merely because DNA report of a child born after gang rape does not establish paternity of the accused, it cannot be construed to mean that the accused can be released on bail as a matter of right!

It is imperative to state here that in heinous crimes like gang rape, bail should not be given at the drop of a hat! A Judge must always in such cases of gang rape exercise his/her mind to the fullest and only then after weighing all the options should an opinion be formed as it will have a direct bearing on the case and the rape victim would be directly affected by it! Justice Bharati Dangre in this leading case too has also very rightly voiced her serious apprehensions about the applicant misusing his position once out on bail and harassing the victim girl.

We see so many cases where the accused after getting bail have even burnt alive the rape victim and so in such cases there should be no question of extending bail to the accused as that could directly endanger the life of the rape victim as also her family! There can be no denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top