Criminal law - Investigating agency ought to have been diligent and circumspect because of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that fouler the crime stricter the proof- Allahabad High Court

Criminal law - Investigating agency ought to have been diligent and circumspect because of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that fouler the crime stricter the proof.

Rape - Medical examination - DNA profiling - Proper investigation - Held, that investigation has not been up to the mark - Notably, from the statement of PW-4, it appears, a trouser and shoes were noticed near the body at the spot - But, surprisingly, there is no seizure of them - Most importantly, blood and other biological material was not collected from the accused for DNA profiling as per the requirement of section 53-A CrPC - It is difficult to accept that if the accused appellant had committed rape and had left his trouser on the spot, there would be no material available for DNA profiling - This raises a question regarding the bona fides of the investigation - More so, when the initial report was with regard to the involvement of two persons - Further, rape of an aged woman, who is a stranger to the accused, baffles us - It was therefore a case where the investigating agency ought to have been diligent and circumspect because of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that fouler the crime stricter the proof - But, here, in the age of scientific advancement, the investigation was anything but scientific.

Upendra versus State of UP