Failure To Put DNA And Forensic Evidence To Accused Vitiates Trial: Punjab And Haryana High Court Quashes Conviction And Death Sentence, Orders Fresh Trial From Section 313 Stage
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana Division Bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur has quashed the conviction and death sentence imposed on an accused convicted for the alleged abduction, sexual assault and murder of a five-year-old girl, and remanded the matter to the Sessions Court for fresh proceedings from the stage of recording his statement. The Court found that the examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was materially defective because crucial incriminating material, including the DNA report and other forensic findings, was not put to the accused for explanation, causing prejudice and vitiating the trial. It directed the trial court to frame short, specific questions under Section 351 BNSS, 2023, allow defence evidence, and deliver a fresh judgment.
The case arose from an incident alleged to have occurred on the intervening night of 20/21 December 2020, involving the abduction, sexual assault, and murder of a five-year-old child. The prosecution alleged that the accused, a plumber residing in the same locality, took the child from her parents’ rented accommodation to his residence, where the offence was committed. The police registered an FIR for offences under the Indian Penal Code, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Following investigation, forensic examinations, medical evidence, and witness statements, the accused was tried by the Sessions Court, which convicted him under multiple provisions, including Sections 376-AB and 302 IPC, and imposed the death penalty. A murder reference was accordingly made to the High Court for confirmation of the death sentence, while the accused filed a criminal appeal challenging the conviction and sentence.
During appellate scrutiny, the High Court examined the manner in which the statement of the accused under Section 313 CrPC was recorded, alongside the evidentiary material relied upon by the trial court, including witness testimonies and forensic reports.
The Court recorded that “at the time of dictating the judgment, we have noticed various flaws in the recording of the statement under §313 CrPC”. It noted that “the statements of the victim’s father and the mother were recorded under §164 CrPC and were tendered in evidence … however, these were not put to the accused under §313 CrPC”.
With respect to forensic evidence, the Court observed that “Ext PZ, the DNA report of the FSL … was not put to the accused Vinod under §313 CrPC” and further stated that “this report … is the most crucial document, and if it is read in evidence without affording an opportunity to the accused … it is most likely to cause prejudice”.
The Court also recorded that “the Toxicology report Ext PY was not put to the accused Vinod” despite evidence indicating consumption of alcohol. On the form of questioning adopted by the trial court, it observed that “to put the entire testimony of PW2 and incorrectly stating that the testimony of PW6 was in similar terms … would be incomprehendible for ordinary people”.
Referring to statutory intent, the Court stated that “a plain and simple reading of the statute refers to ‘circumstances appearing in evidence’ and not the entire statement”. It further recorded that “the manner in which the entire incriminating circumstances were put to the accused is contrary to the spirit of §313 CrPC”.
The Bench also noted that “these deficiencies, which amount to irregularities, are curable” and that “no prejudice shall be caused to the accused if these questions are put to him after a lapse of five years”.
The Court directed that “without commenting on the cases’ merits, the impugned judgment and the order on sentence are quashed and set aside” and further ordered that “the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court to resume the proceedings from the stage of the recording of the statement of the accused under §351 BNSS, 2023 [§313 CrPC]”.
“CRA-D-750-2021, filed by Vinod, is disposed of to the extent that the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence is quashed and set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the Sessions Court to either take it on their own or assign it to some other trial Court/Successor Court which has the jurisdiction”.
“The trial Court shall put all the incriminating evidence to the accused by making small questions as per the facts and evidence under §351 BNSS [§313 CrPC, 1973]” and that “after that afford him an opportunity to lead defence evidence, if he wants to do so, provided the same is done within a reasonable time. Thereafter, on hearing the parties pass a fresh judgment in accordance with the law”.
“Murder Reference No. 3 of 2021 is disposed of because, as on date, it has rendered infructuous. To comply with Section 412 BNSS, 2023 [371 CrPC, 1973], the proper officer of the High Court shall, without delay, send either physically or through electronic means, a copy of the order, under the seal of the High Court and attested with their official signature, to the Court of Session”.
“Registry is directed to send back the entire record of the Trial Court, along with a certified copy of this Judgment, to the concerned Sessions Judge. Considering the time for which the matter was pending before this Court since the year 2021, and the FIR is of the year 2020, we request the trial Court to expedite the hearing by striking a balance between Speedy Justice and Buried Justice”.
“Both matters stand closed on the terms set out in this verdict” and that “all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of”.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners/Appellant (State of Haryana): Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, Additional Advocate General, Haryana; Mr. Atul Gaur, Additional Advocate General, Haryana
For the Respondent/Convict: Mr. Ashwani Bhandwal, Advocate; Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocate
Case Title: State of Haryana v. Vinod @ Munna
Neutral Citation: 2026: PHHC:006238-DB
Case Numbers: Murder Reference No. 3 of 2021; CRA-D-750-2021
Bench: Justice Anoop Chitkara, Justice Sukhvinder Kaur
