How rape-murder case collapsed: SC raised doubts on evidence & process

COURT SAYS The DNA evidence is in the nature of opinion evidence as envisaged under Section 45 (opinions of experts), and like any other opinion evidence, its probative value varies from case to case

- Vineet.Upadhyay @timesgroup.com

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday caused a stir when it acquitted three men accused of raping and murdering a 19-year-old Chhawla teenager, observing that witnesses were not adequately examined and the accused were deprived of their right to a fair trial besides the fact that truth could not be elicited by the trial court. A bench of Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi observed in their order that "many glaring lapses" had occurred during the trial.

The bench noted that Section 165 (a judge's power to put questions or order production) of the Indian Evidence Act confers "unbridled powers" upon the trial courts to put any question at any stage to the witnesses to elicit the truth. "As observed in several decisions, the judge is not expected to be a passive umpire but is supposed to actively participate in the trial and to question the witnesses to reach a correct conclusion," said the judges.

The court said the entire case of the prosecution rested on "circumstantial evidence" and the "totality of circumstances" along with evidence on record prove that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused.