Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, May 30
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has castigated the investigating agencies for lackadaisical approach in collecting DNA samples of the rape accused, despite clear legal mandates. The admonition came as Justice Harpreet Singh Brar asked the director-generals of the two States and the UT to file affidavits demonstrating compliance with directions issued by the court to produce the accused before a medical practitioner for blood sample collection in accordance with Section 53-A of the CrPC.
Referring to the Division Bench judgment, Justice Brar asserted it had declared Section 53-A mandatory before issuing directions to the police chiefs of the two States and the UT for its scrupulous compliance.
“Everyday this court witnesses cases, where the accused accrues undue advantage owing to the lackadaisical attitude of the investigating agencies in collecting DNA samples, in spite of the existence of the provisions under Section 53-A and the directions issued by the court. However, it appears that the provision exists merely on paper as evidenced by the widespread apathy and insouciance prevalent among the investigating agencies, which has pricked the conscience of this Court,” Justice Brar asserted.
The censure came in case of an intellectually disabled girl raped and left pregnant. The accused in the case was seeking directions to the trial court for her psychiatric evaluation to assess her competency as a witness.
Justice Brar observed it was imperative for the investigating officer to scrupulously follow the drill of Section 53-A, especially for victims of tender age and with intellectual disabilities as they might not be able to effectively advocate for themselves. Justice Brar added the investigating officer was duty bound to produce the accused before a medical practitioner before submitting a written application for collection of his blood sample as provided under Section 53-A and use ‘such force as necessary for the purpose’
Justice Brar observed the courts, too, were required to take on a more proactive and empathetic role in litigation involving persons with disabilities, considering the glaring lack of social support system on the State’s part
It was the court’s onerous duty to maintain a middle ground to secure fair investigation and trial of the accused without sacrificing the interest of the victim and the society. The courts, as such, were required to ensure that the victim’s right to seek justice did not stand unjustly compromised in a bid to secure justice for the accused. The right to fair trial was not restricted to the accused but extended to the victim and the society as well, Justice Brar added.
Justice Brar added the entire attention these days was given to the accused to ensure fair investigation and fair trial, while little concern was shown to the victim and the society.
