The Court was hearing with a revision application filed by the applicant challenging the decision of a special court designated to hear cases under the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act)
The special court in Purba Medinipur had, by an order passed on January 16, 2017, refused to discharge the applicant from the rape case.
The applicant had heavily relied upon a DNA report which revealed that he was not the biological father of the child.
However, the special court came to the conclusion that though the applicant may not be a biological father of the child, that does not necessarily mean that he has not committed rape as alleged.
For this, the special court said evidence needs to be adduced from both the sides and therefore, it would be prejudicial if the accused is discharged only on the basis of DNA Report since the allegation of the victim was that the accused has committed rape forcibly on several occasions on different dates.
The accused then moved the High Court.
Source: Barandbench
