The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has held that DNA evidence and handwriting analysis of contested documents are crucial pieces of evidence for effective adjudication in rape cases. While the Court allowed the prosecutrix’s plea for a DNA test of the accused to determine the paternity of her child, it also upheld a trial court order allowing the accused to have a contested letter analyzed by a handwriting expert to establish a defense of consent.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Manoj Bajaj while deciding three separate petitions: an application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. (challenging handwriting analysis), an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (challenging the rejection of a DNA test), and a Criminal Revision (seeking summoning of additional accused).
Background of the Case
The matter originates from Case Crime No. 188 of 2018, registered at Police Station Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad, involving offences under Sections 376 (Rape), 313 (Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent), and 506 (Criminal intimidation) of the I.P.C.
The prosecutrix alleged that the accused, Shashi Bhushan Gupta, and his relatives raped her on September 27, 2015, in her house. She further alleged that the accused promised marriage but later forced her to undergo an abortion on July 29, 2016. According to the allegations, the accused continued to set up physical relations by using obscene videos to threaten her, leading to a second pregnancy and the subsequent birth of a daughter.
While the F.I.R. named relatives, the charge sheet was filed only against the accused-opposite party no. 2.
Arguments of the Parties
For the Petitioner-Prosecutrix: Counsel for the petitioner-prosecutrix argued against the trial court’s order dated October 23, 2024, which allowed the accused’s application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for handwriting analysis of a letter. The counsel contended that since the prosecutrix had already denied writing the letter during cross-examination, the trial court should not have ordered an expert examination.
Regarding the DNA test, the counsel challenged the order dated August 25, 2022, which had dismissed the prosecutrix’s application. The trial court had rejected the DNA test on the grounds that the Investigating Officer was not informed about such a test and the trial had reached an advanced stage.
For the Accused-Opposite Party: Counsel for the accused argued that the letter in question would reveal the prosecutrix’s consent, which is central to his defense. He maintained that denying an expert analysis would result in prejudice and violate the right to a fair trial. On the issue of the DNA test, the counsel supported the trial court’s dismissal, citing the “belated stage” of the request.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
On Handwriting Analysis (Section 311 Cr.P.C.): The Court observed that the mere denial of handwriting by the prosecutrix during cross-examination is not a valid ground to deny the accused the opportunity to prove his defense. The Court noted:
“If the accused is making an attempt to rebut the prosecution evidence to prove consent by the prosecutrix, the examination of the handwriting in the subject letter by an expert would be a crucial piece of evidence for effective and proper adjudication.”
The Court further emphasized that rejecting such an application would amount to “depriving him of his right to fair trial.”
On DNA Testing: The Court found the trial court’s reasoning for rejecting the DNA test—namely, the advanced stage of the trial and the inaction of the Investigating Officer—to be unsustainable. Justice Bajaj observed:
“The said report DNA would also be a crucial piece of evidence having a direct bearing on the prosecution case, and the reasons given by the trial court that the trial has reached at an advanced stage or the investigating officer had not conducted the test, is not a good ground to reject the prayer.”
Final Decision
The High Court passed the following orders:
- Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 12417 of 2025: Dismissed. The trial court’s order allowing handwriting analysis of the letter stands.
- Application U/S 482 No. 42067 of 2022: Allowed. The Court directed that the accused shall provide requisite samples for a DNA comparison with the daughter of the prosecutrix as directed by the trial court.
- Criminal Revision No. 1738 of 2021: Dismissed as withdrawn, as the petitioner did not press the challenge against the refusal to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
Case Details Block:
- Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- Case Title: Prosecutrix Vs. State of U.P. and Another
- Case Number: Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 12417 of 2025 (and connected matters)
- Bench: Justice Manoj Bajaj
- Date: April 2, 2026
