Court Criticizes Police Handling, Urges Training for Officers; DNA Test Reveals Accused Not Biological Father
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice G.S. Ahluwalia, has rejected the bail application of Jitendra, accused of raping a minor, while directing police to conduct further investigation to identify the biological father of the child born to the victim. The decision was handed down in Jabalpur on February 10, 2026, highlighting deficiencies in police procedures and a lack of legal knowledge among officers.
The case involves a minor prosecutrix who gave birth to a child, with the accused, Jitendra, being charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the POCSO Act. A DNA test revealed that Jitendra is not the biological father, prompting the court to stress the necessity for continued investigation to uncover the true perpetrator. The prosecutrix’s statement has yet to be recorded, a fact that weighed in the court's decision to deny bail at this stage.
Justice Ahluwalia expressed serious concerns over the handling of the case by the police, particularly the Superintendent of Police, Betul, Virendra Jain. The court was particularly critical of the police's inertia despite receiving the DNA test results in December 2025, which clearly indicated that Jitendra was not the father. The judgment cited previous incidents of similar nature in Sagar and Datia, where police inaction had initially impeded justice.
Further, the court directed the Superintendent of Police to seek permission from the trial court for further investigation, emphasizing the importance of DNA profiling and circumstantial evidence in tracing the biological father. The court’s order also underscored the need for improved police training and competency, directing the Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, to address these systemic issues.
This judgment reflects the judiciary's proactive stance in ensuring justice and accountability in cases involving minors and highlights the critical need for efficient and knowledgeable police work in such sensitive matters.
Bottom Line:
Bail application rejected as DNA test revealed applicant is not the biological father of the child born to minor prosecutrix; however, statement of the prosecutrix has not yet been recorded, and further investigation directed to trace the biological father of the child.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483, Cr.P.C. Section 439, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 64(2)(m), 332(b), POCSO Act Sections 5L/6, 5j(ii)
Jitendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc id # 2852602
