The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed that conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 can rest solely on forensic evidence, even when prosecution witnesses turn hostile. The judgment underscores that DNA evidence prevails over inconsistent testimonies, provided the chain of custody is unbroken and the evidence is scientifically reliable.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The appellant, Devi Singh Yadav, was convicted under Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act for offences involving a minor prosecutrix. The trial court sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000, with default stipulation of additional imprisonment. The appellant filed a second application for suspension of sentence and bail (I.A. No. 1572/2026) after his first application was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.11.2024.
Key Facts
The appellant was convicted based on DNA evidence linking him to the crime
The prosecution alleged that the appellant’s DNA profile was found on the under garment of the prosecutrix
The appellant’s counsel argued that the under garment of the prosecutrix was swapped with that of the appellant’s wife, thereby contaminating the evidence
The appellant did not raise this defence during his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
The under garment of the prosecutrix was sealed prior to the appellant’s arrest, ensuring the integrity of the evidence
Prosecution witnesses turned hostile, but the DNA report remained unchallenged
Procedural History
Date of Conviction: Not explicitly stated, but the appeal arises from a trial court judgment
18.11.2024: First bail application dismissed as withdrawn
I.A. No. 1572/2026: Second application for suspension of sentence and bail filed
10.07.2026: High Court dismisses the second bail application
Relief Sought
The appellant sought suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending appeal, arguing that the DNA evidence was unreliable due to alleged tampering with the under garment.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether conviction under the POCSO Act can be sustained solely on the basis of DNA evidence when prosecution witnesses turn hostile and the accused alleges contamination of forensic samples.
Arguments Presented
For the Appellant
Argued that the DNA evidence was unreliable as the under garment of the prosecutrix was allegedly swapped with that of the appellant’s wife
Contended that the prosecution witnesses turning hostile weakened the case against the appellant
Submitted that the defence of tampering should be considered, even though it was not raised under Section 313 CrPC
For the Respondent/State
Relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat ((2019) 17 SCC 523), which held that conviction can rest on forensic evidence even if witnesses turn hostile
Argued that the DNA report conclusively established the appellant’s presence on the under garment of the prosecutrix
Emphasized that the under garment was sealed prior to the appellant’s arrest, ensuring the integrity of the evidence
Contended that the appellant’s failure to raise the tampering defence under Section 313 CrPC weakened his argument
The Court's Analysis
The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat, which established that forensic evidence, such as DNA reports, can sustain a conviction even if prosecution witnesses turn hostile. The Court observed:
"Even if the prosecutrix turned hostile, still the accused can be convicted on the basis of forensic evidence."
The Court further noted that the appellant’s defence of tampering was not raised during his statement under Section 313 CrPC, which significantly undermined its credibility. Additionally, the under garment of the prosecutrix was sealed prior to the appellant’s arrest, ensuring that the chain of custody was maintained and the evidence was scientifically reliable.
The Court distinguished the appellant’s argument by emphasizing that mere allegations of tampering, without supporting evidence or procedural compliance, cannot discredit forensic evidence. The DNA report clearly indicated the presence of the appellant’s DNA profile, which was sufficient to uphold the conviction.
The Verdict
The High Court dismissed the appellant’s application for suspension of sentence and bail (I.A. No. 1572/2026). The Court held that DNA evidence alone is sufficient to sustain a conviction under the POCSO Act, even in the absence of consistent witness testimonies. No relief was granted to the appellant.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Forensic Evidence Prevails Over Hostile Witnesses
Courts may rely solely on DNA or other forensic evidence to convict an accused, even if prosecution witnesses turn hostile
Hostile witnesses do not automatically weaken the prosecution’s case if forensic evidence is conclusive
Chain of Custody Is Critical
Sealing of evidence prior to arrest is crucial to establish the integrity of forensic samples
Allegations of tampering must be raised during trial (e.g., under Section 313 CrPC) to be considered credible
Limits of Defence Strategies
Failure to raise a defence during trial can significantly weaken an accused’s position in appeal
Unsubstantiated claims of evidence tampering are unlikely to succeed without procedural compliance or supporting evidence
