The Gujarat High Court has dismissed the State’s appeal challenging the acquittal of Rasikbhai @ Kaushikbhai Havsingbhai Garasiya in a case involving allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act. The Division Bench of Justice Ilesh J. Vora and Justice R. T. Vachhani delivered the judgment on September 24, 2026.
The prosecution alleged that the minor victim, aged about 17 years and 10 months, had been in a relationship with the respondent for around two years and that the relationship involved repeated penetrative sexual assault. It was further alleged that she became pregnant and later suffered a miscarriage after being given medicine by the respondent.
The matter came to light after the victim developed heavy bleeding on March 24, 2025. Her father subsequently lodged an FIR at Limdi Police Station. During investigation, medical examinations were conducted, samples were collected for DNA analysis and the victim’s statement was recorded before a Judicial Magistrate.
The trial court eventually acquitted the accused after the victim did not support the prosecution’s allegations during her evidence. The State challenged that decision before the High Court.
Before the High Court, the State argued that the trial court had failed to properly consider the medical and scientific evidence, particularly the DNA Analysis Report. It was submitted that the fact that the victim had turned hostile did not by itself erase other evidence concerning the allegations.
The High Court, however, closely examined how the DNA evidence had been brought on record. It noted that the prosecution had not examined the scientific expert who had conducted the DNA profiling test. The report had been exhibited through the Investigating Officer.
The Bench observed:
"It is settled position of law that DNA Profiling Report is inadmissible in evidence if the Scientific Expert who conducted the examination is not produced and examined by the prosecution in court. Mere exhibition of the report through the Investigating Officer is insufficient, as the reliability of the technics applied and the integrity of the findings must be established through expert testimony."
The Court referred to the Supreme Court decision in Rahul v. State of Delhi while considering the evidentiary value of the DNA report.
The Bench also noted that the victim had acknowledged being in a relationship with the respondent but denied that he had maintained physical relations with her or that she had become pregnant by him. She also did not admit the contents of her statement recorded before the Magistrate.
The Court noted that, except for the DNA Analysis Report, nothing was on record to prove the involvement of the accused in the crime. The Court further held that the DNA evidence had not been proved in accordance with law and that the prosecution had failed to establish that the accused committed the alleged repeated penetrative sexual assault and miscarriage.
The Gujarat High Court concluded that the trial court’s view was a reasonable and possible view based on the evidence before it. Finding no perversity or substantial and compelling reason to interfere, the Bench upheld the acquittal.
The Court accordingly dismissed the State’s appeal at the admission stage.
Case Title: State of Gujarat v. Rasikbhai @ Kaushikbhai Havsingbhai Garasiya
Case Number: R/Criminal Appeal (Against Acquittal) No. 1231 of 2026
