IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-17935 of 2009 Date of Decision : August 28, 2009 Salim son of Ishaqu .... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH * * * Present : Mr. R.S.Rai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jamshed Ahmad, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yash Pal Malik, AAG, Haryana. * * * AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had, while the prosecutrix was answering the call of nature, forcibly laid her down and raped her against her wishes and thereafter threatened to kill her if she made hue and cry. He submits that he has wrongly been involved in the offence as he has not committed the rape. The basis for making such submission by the counsel for the petitioner is that the blood sample of the petitioner was sent for DNA analysis along with the semen, which was found on the salwar of the prosecutrix. As per the report of Forensic Science Laboratory, Crl. Misc. No. M-17935 of 2009 -2- Madhubanm Karnal, the DNA profile of the petitioner has not matched with the DNA profile of seminal stains of the prosecutrix. He, on this basis, submits that even if some rape was committed, the same was not committed by the petitioner as it was the positive case of prosecution that the semen belonging to the petitioner has not matched with the prosecutrix. Counsel for the State has very fairly stated that as per the report of the DNA profile received from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, Karnal, the DNA profile of the petitioner does not match with that of the semen, which was found on the salwar of the prosecutrix. He further submits that there are two allegations against the petitioner, therefore, he should not be enlarged on bail. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. In the light of the above position, a doubt has been created with regard to the alleged offence stated to have been committed by the petitioner, which would, therefore, depend upon the evidence, which has been led by the prosecution before the trial Court. The petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2008 and the trial is not likely to conclude soon, therefore, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Petition stands disposed of. August 28, 2009 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) pj JUDGE