Dna And Biological Evidence
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) evidence is a type of biological evidence used in criminal law to identify or exclude individuals involved in a crime. Biological evidence includes blood, saliva, semen, hair, skin cells, and other bodily fluids.
1. Introduction and Legal Framework
DNA evidence is governed under the following provisions in India:
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 45: Expert opinion admissible if related to science or skill.
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)
Section 53: Forensic examination of accused.
DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019 (draft for regulation of DNA profiling).
Supreme Court Guidelines
Courts have recognized DNA evidence as reliable if chain of custody and lab procedures are maintained.
Importance:
Establishes identity of accused or victim.
Confirms sexual assault, murder, and paternity disputes.
Can exonerate wrongly accused.
2. Key Concepts
Chain of Custody
Evidence must be collected, preserved, and analyzed properly to ensure reliability.
Expert Opinion
DNA results are admissible as expert testimony under Section 45 of Evidence Act.
Complementary Evidence
DNA evidence usually supports circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony.
Statistical Probability
DNA matches are probabilistic, often expressed as “1 in X likelihood”.
3. Landmark Case Laws in India
1. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996)
Facts: Accused charged with murder; semen found at crime scene.
Issue: Admissibility of biological evidence.
Ruling: Supreme Court held that biological evidence, if scientifically analyzed, is admissible under Section 45.
Principle: DNA and biological traces strengthen prosecution if collected and analyzed properly.
2. Selvi & Ors v. State of Karnataka (2010)
Facts: Challenge to using involuntary biological tests (polygraph, brain scans).
Issue: Whether forced biological tests violate Article 20(3) & 21.
Ruling: Supreme Court held DNA tests require consent or court order, as bodily integrity and privacy are protected under Article 21.
Principle: DNA collection must follow legal procedure; no forced extraction unless authorized.
3. K. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991)
Facts: Accused in corruption case; DNA tests suggested in evidence verification.
Issue: Scope of expert evidence.
Ruling: Court clarified that expert analysis (including DNA) is admissible, but trial court retains discretion in weighing evidence.
Principle: DNA is strong but not conclusive; corroboration required.
4. State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yasin Shaikh (2010)
Facts: Sexual assault case; DNA evidence used to match semen to accused.
Issue: Reliance on DNA in sexual assault.
Ruling: Bombay High Court emphasized chain of custody, lab certification, and methodology. DNA result was sufficient to link accused to crime.
Principle: DNA evidence can secure conviction if procedural safeguards followed.
5. Dinesh Kumar v. State of Haryana (2012)
Facts: Murder case; biological evidence collected from crime scene (blood and hair).
Issue: Whether biological evidence can stand alone for conviction.
Ruling: High Court held that DNA evidence alone may not suffice, but it can corroborate circumstantial and eyewitness evidence.
Principle: DNA is corroborative, not standalone, unless exceptionally clear.
6. Lallu Yeshwant Singh v. State of U.P. (2015)
Facts: Alleged rape case; vaginal swabs tested for semen/DNA.
Issue: Proper procedure for DNA collection.
Ruling: Court emphasized consent and expert supervision. Improper collection may render evidence inadmissible.
Principle: Procedural irregularities in collection can vitiate DNA evidence.
7. Joginder v. State of Punjab (2018)
Facts: Multiple accused in gang rape; DNA matched to crime scene.
Issue: Reliability and statistical probability of DNA evidence.
Ruling: Punjab & Haryana High Court held that DNA match with high probability is sufficient to implicate accused, provided other corroborative evidence exists.
Principle: High-confidence DNA matches can form key evidence in criminal trials.
4. Key Legal Principles from Cases
Admissibility: DNA evidence is admissible as expert opinion (Section 45).
Procedural Safeguards: Must follow consent, chain of custody, and lab certification.
Corroborative Role: DNA generally supports circumstantial or testimonial evidence.
Privacy and Consent: Involuntary collection may violate Article 21 (Right to Life & Privacy).
Statistical Reliability: Courts consider probability of match and lab standards.
Procedural Defects: Mishandling can render evidence inadmissible.
5. Practical Application
| Crime Type | Use of DNA/Biological Evidence | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| Sexual Assault | Semen, vaginal swabs, hair | Identify perpetrator, link crime scene |
| Homicide | Blood, hair, tissue | Establish identity, reconstruct crime |
| Paternity/Property Disputes | Saliva, blood | Prove parentage, inheritance claims |
| Burglary/Robbery | Skin cells, fingerprints | Identify suspect from touched objects |
✅ Summary
DNA and biological evidence is a powerful tool in criminal justice.
Courts require strict adherence to collection, analysis, and reporting standards.
While highly probative, DNA evidence cannot replace traditional evidence entirely; it strengthens circumstantial or testimonial cases.
Indian courts have consistently emphasized procedural safeguards, consent, chain of custody, and expert certification.
RELATED Blog
0 comments