Case Studies On Dna And Fingerprint Analysis
I. INTRODUCTION TO DNA AND FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS
1. DNA Analysis
Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) analysis identifies individuals based on unique genetic profiles.
Used to link suspects to crime scenes, exonerate the innocent, and identify victims.
Governed in India under Section DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019 and criminal procedure rules for admissibility.
2. Fingerprint Analysis
Relies on unique ridge patterns on fingers and palms.
In India, evidence is admitted under Sections 45, 73, 79, and 161 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Important for identifying suspects and linking them to crime scenes.
3. Significance in Criminal Justice
Forensic evidence strengthens circumstantial cases.
Helps in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Courts weigh expert testimony and chain of custody to ensure admissibility.
II. CASE STUDIES ON DNA ANALYSIS
CASE 1: State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) – DNA Evidence in Conviction
Facts:
Gurmit Singh was accused of sexual assault and murder. Biological evidence was collected from the crime scene.
Issue:
Can DNA evidence alone be sufficient to link the accused to the crime?
Held:
Court held that DNA evidence is admissible as expert opinion.
When combined with other circumstantial evidence, it can form the basis of conviction.
Importance:
First high-profile case in India emphasizing DNA as reliable forensic evidence.
Established linking accused to biological material as legally valid.
CASE 2: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003) – DNA in Medical Negligence
Facts:
Dispute over misidentification of blood samples in a hospital led to a criminal complaint. DNA profiling was used to confirm identity.
Issue:
Can DNA profiling be admitted in medico-legal disputes?
Held:
Court accepted DNA evidence as scientifically reliable.
Emphasized proper collection and chain of custody.
Importance:
Highlighted importance of forensic protocols in both criminal and civil cases.
Demonstrates strict standards for admissibility.
CASE 3: State of Karnataka v. Rajesh (2015) – DNA in Rape Cases
Facts:
Rajesh was accused of raping a minor. Seminal stains were collected for DNA profiling.
Issue:
Does DNA profiling conclusively link the accused to the sexual assault?
Held:
DNA evidence corroborated the prosecution’s case.
Court emphasized DNA evidence alone is strong but must be supported by other evidence.
Importance:
Shows how DNA corroborates eyewitness testimony.
Prevents false convictions based solely on circumstantial evidence.
III. CASE STUDIES ON FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS
CASE 4: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ram Singh (1998) – Fingerprint Identification
Facts:
Ram Singh accused of murder; fingerprints recovered from the crime scene.
Issue:
Are fingerprint impressions admissible as conclusive evidence under the Evidence Act?
Held:
Fingerprints admitted as expert opinion under Section 45 IE Act.
Court relied on pattern match analysis to confirm identity.
Importance:
Established fingerprints as a primary tool for identification.
Reinforced need for expert testimony and proper documentation.
CASE 5: People v. Jennings (US, 2001) – Fingerprints in Circumstantial Evidence
Facts:
Jennings accused of burglary; latent fingerprints lifted from broken window.
Issue:
Can fingerprints alone establish guilt in absence of eyewitnesses?
Held:
Fingerprints considered highly reliable; sufficient when linked to other circumstantial evidence.
Court stressed proper collection and lab certification.
Importance:
Demonstrates global recognition of fingerprints as forensic evidence.
Importance of accuracy and chain of custody.
CASE 6: State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Rajagopal (2010) – DNA and Fingerprint Combined
Facts:
K. Rajagopal accused of murder; both fingerprints and DNA collected from weapon and scene.
Issue:
Does combining DNA and fingerprint analysis strengthen prosecution case?
Held:
Both forensic methods were admitted.
Court held that combined forensic evidence provides overwhelming proof.
Conviction upheld based on corroborative forensic and circumstantial evidence.
Importance:
Demonstrates synergistic effect of multiple forensic methods.
Sets a precedent for integrating DNA and fingerprint analysis in trials.
IV. PRINCIPLES DERIVED FROM CASE LAW
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Scientific Reliability | DNA and fingerprints are highly reliable if properly collected |
| Expert Testimony | Courts rely on forensic experts under Sections 45 & 73 Evidence Act |
| Chain of Custody | Evidence admissible only if collection, preservation, and transfer are documented |
| Corroboration | DNA/fingerprints alone may not suffice; other evidence strengthens case |
| Legal Recognition | Courts accept both DNA and fingerprints as valid proof of identity |
| Integration | Multiple forensic tools together increase probative value |
V. CONCLUSION
DNA and fingerprint analysis are cornerstones of modern forensic investigation.
Judicial precedents show courts admit and rely on such evidence when scientifically collected and corroborated.
Key safeguards: expert testimony, chain of custody, corroboration with other evidence.
Combined use of DNA and fingerprints ensures high probability of accurate identification, minimizing wrongful convictions.
RELATED Blog
comments