Page No.# 1/6 GAHC030000112026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/3/2026 Sh. Ramliankima R/o Hmawngbu, Lawngtlai VERSUS The State of Mizoram and Anr. Aizawl2:Smt. Zirduhchhung Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Victor L Ralte Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram Linked Case : Crl.A./5/2025 Ramliankima r/b Smt. Zonghaki d/o Khawvelkhupa r/o Chawlhhmun Aizawl Hmawngbu Lawngtlai District VERSUS The State of Mizoram and Anr. Aizawl 2:Zirduhchhungi Bungtlang South Page No.# 2/6 Vengthar-II Lawngtlai District Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Victor L Ralte Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP Mizoram B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 04.06.2026 (Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J) Heard Mr. Victor L. Ralte, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Ms. Emily L. Chhangte, learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No. 2. 2. This IA has been referred under Section 432 of the BNSS for seeking a direction for taking of additional evidence by conducting DNA test. The applicant/appellant was convicted by the Learned Trial Court by holding that the prosecution has proved that the accused had committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim who is 14 years old, twice, i.e., on 18.02.2021 & 19.02.2021, as a result of which the victim got pregnant and gave birth to a child on 14.10.2021. Page No.# 3/6 3. The applicant is a citizen of India by birth and a permanent resident of Hmawngbu, Lawngtlai District, Mizoram and, as such, he is entitled to all the rights, protections and privileges guaranteed under the Constitution of India and the laws framed thereunder or any other law in force. 4. The Learned Trial Court, after conducting a full-fledged trial, convicted the applicant/appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to R.I. for 20 years and fine of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) I.D. Simple Imprisonment for 5 months. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant/appellant that the fact that the victim had given birth to a child would not per se implicate the applicant/appellant. In fact, the delivery of the child took place on 14.10.2021 and the dates of alleged occurrence were 18.02.2021 & 19.02.2021, which shows that there was a gap of only about 8 months, whereas a normal pregnancy lasts around 9 months. Therefore, there is a strong possibility that the applicant/appellant is not guilty of the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that the DNA test will go a long way in establishing the innocence of the accused who insists that he is not the father of the child. The applicant/appellant had filed another IA (Crl) No. 36/2025 under Section 432 BNSS for production of the birth certificate of the baby boy, namely, Samuel Page No.# 4/6 N.C. Lalchhanchhuaha, son of the prosecutrix. It was the contention of the applicant/appellant that as per the birth certificate of the baby boy, said to be born on 14.10.2021, the name of the father of the said baby boy was recorded as ‘X’, which tallies with the name of the father of the prosecutrix, who could therefore be the father of the baby boy. In the said IA, it was the stand of the prosecution that the said name has been reflected in the birth certificate as the father of the baby boy, since the accused applicant/appellant had refused to acknowledge his child and that a DNA test would make the whole case clear regarding the fatherhood of the said baby boy. 6. It is reflected in the Order dated 19.11.2025 passed in the Criminal Appeal No. 5/2025 that in response to the aforesaid contention of the prosecution, the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant had sought and was granted time to consult with the accused/appellant as to whether he was willing to undergo a DNA test to prove that he is not the father of the baby boy. Thereafter, the instant IA has been filed by the applicant/appellant seeking DNA test. 7. In view of the above developments and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that it would be in the interest of justice to have a DNA test conducted as prayed for. Page No.# 5/6 8. Accordingly, we direct the Learned District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl to conduct the said DNA test under his/her supervision after causing production of the accused/appellant, who is lodged in Central Jail Aizawl, and of the victim and the baby boy, the details of whom are available in the case record. Also, we further direct the Superintendent of Police, Lawngtlai to cause the production of the victim and the baby in coordination with the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Siaha on the date to be fixed by the Learned District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl. Needless to say, the Learned District & Session Judge, Aizawl may also pass necessary orders directing the assistance of the appropriate medical personnel for the purpose of drawing of the DNA samples and also for sending the same to the appropriate institution for testing. This exercise shall be completed within a period of 2 months. 9. Send the TCR to the Learned District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl for further necessary action along with a copy of this order. 10. Upon completion of the aforesaid exercise, the DNA report along with the TCR shall be sent back to this Court. 11. This disposes of the instant IA (Crl.) No. 12/2025. Page No.# 6/6 JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant