Guidelines to Maintain Integrity of DNA Samples

Context

The Supreme Court recently published standards in Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamil Nadu to protect the integrity of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) samples in criminal proceedings.

Importance of DNA Evidence in Criminal Trials

• The genetic information in all living things is encoded by the molecule known as DNA.
• It can be extracted from biological samples like blood, saliva, hair, skin, sperm, and bone.
• When the DNA profile of a sample discovered at a crime scene matches the DNA profile of a suspect, it is generally fair to assume that the biological origin of both samples is the same. In criminal proceedings, however, it is not conclusive proof.
• The Supreme Court ruled in the Devakar case that DNA evidence is merely the opinion of an expert (under Section 45 of the Evidence Act / Section). 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023).
• Before a court can rely on DNA evidence, it must be adequately supported by scientific and legal proof.

SC Direction Is Required

• Procedural Delays: The court discovered substantial, unexplained delays in the delivery of samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for DNA testing.
• Lack of Consistency: Despite the fact that various organizations have produced some norms, there is no consistency and no common process that all investigating agencies are obligated to adhere to.

SC’s Guidelines

• In cases involving DNA evidence, the Supreme Court established four principles.
• Collection Method: The document recording the collection must include the names and titles of the medical personnel who were there, the investigating officer, and any independent witnesses.
• Transportation: It will be the responsibility of the investigating officer to deliver the DNA evidence (sample) to the relevant police station or hospital.
  • Within 48 hours after collection, samples must arrive to the relevant FSL.
  • The causes of any delay must be documented, and every attempt should be made to maintain the samples.
• Sample Handling: No package may be opened, modified, or resealed while samples are kept awaiting trial or appeal without the trial court’s explicit consent.
• Custody Chain Register: A Chain of Custody Register must be kept from the moment of acquisition until the logical conclusion, such as the accused’s conviction or acquittal.
  • This register must be added to the trial court file. The officer conducting the investigation is accountable for addressing any cases of noncompliance.

Earlier Decisions of SC

• The Supreme Court said in Anil v. State of Maharashtra (2014) that the validity and reliability of a DNA profile are contingent upon the laboratory’s quality control and procedures.
• The Supreme Court in Manoj and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) dismissed a DNA report on the basis that the sample was taken ‘from’ the state.
• The Ministry of Home Affairs rejected’ DNA evidence in Rahul v. State of Delhi (2022) because it remained in the police Malkhana for two months. and it was impossible to rule out the potential for tampering during that period.

Conclusion

• The Supreme Court published rules to guarantee consistent practices, even if ‘Police’ and ‘Public Order’ are under the State List.
• It emphasized the significance of both the investigating agency collecting samples (in a manner free of contamination and delay) and the FSL performing quality control in order to produce trustworthy results.

Source: The Hindu

Prelims PYQ

Q.Consider the following statements: DNA Barcoding can be a tool to:(2022)

1. assess the age of a plant or animal.
2. distinguish among species that look alike.
3. identify undesirable animal or plant materials in processed foods.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 1 and 2
(d) 2 and 3

Download as PDF