Supreme Court Guidelines on DNA Evidence

The Supreme Court in Devakar v. State of Tamil Nadu (2025) issued uniform DNA evidence guidelines to standardise procedures & safeguard forensic credibility.

What is DNA?

DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms.
Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the mitochondria (where it is called mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA).
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism.
Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99% of those bases are the same in all people.

Framework for DNA Evidence in India

Constitutional Basis: Article 20(3) excludes DNA from self-incrimination, while Article 21 ensures collection remains constitutionally valid by protecting privacy and dignity.
BNSS Authority: Sections 53 and 53A of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 permit DNA examination of accused persons during ongoing criminal investigations.
Identification Act: The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, authorises DNA and biometric data collection from convicts, arrestees, and detainees for record purposes.
Evidence Law: Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, classifies DNA analysis as expert opinion admissible in judicial proceedings.
State Authority: ‘Police’ and ‘Public Order’ fall under the State List, making states responsible for DNA collection, preservation, and procedural compliance.

SC Guidelines on DNA Evidence Handling

Collection Protocol: Collection must include FIR details and signatures of the doctor, investigator, and witness, ensuring authenticity and traceability.
Timely Transport: Investigating officers must deliver sealed samples to Forensic Science Laboratories (FSL) within 48 hours, with written reasons for any unavoidable delay.
Secure Storage: Samples cannot be opened, altered, or resealed without trial court approval, safeguarding against tampering and preserving evidential value.
Custody Register: A chain-of-custody register must track every transfer, ensuring evidence remains verifiable throughout proceedings.

Significance of DNA Evidence in Criminal Cases

Forensic Accuracy: DNA’s unique markers enable precise identification from minute samples, enhancing the reliability of forensic investigations.
Judicial Corroboration: Recognised as expert opinion under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, DNA provides crucial scientific corroboration in serious criminal offences.
Exoneration Aid: DNA evidence offers strong exclusionary proof for exoneration, preventing miscarriages of justice, as demonstrated in the 2025 Devakar case.
Victim Identification: DNA enables the identification of decomposed victims in mass disasters, facilitating closure, succession rights and insurance claims for affected families.
Civil Dispute Resolution: Courts employ DNA in paternity, custody, and inheritance disputes; in Sharda v. Dharmpal (2003), its admissibility was judicially affirmed.

Concerns in DNA-Based Prosecution

Procedural Lapses: Delays, improper sealing, or missing documentation risk contamination, undermining DNA’s admissibility as reliable forensic evidence.
Forensic Capacity: Limited Forensic Science Laboratories (FSL), uneven training, and heavy backlogs delay testing, thereby prolonging trials and delaying justice delivery.
Interpretation Limits: Low-template or mixed DNA samples complicate analysis, often yielding inconclusive results that weaken judicial confidence.
Over-Reliance: Courts sometimes treat DNA as conclusive proof, overlooking its status as an advisory opinion under Section 39 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
Privacy Concerns: The absence of dedicated DNA legislation heightens the risks of data misuse, state surveillance, and violation of individual genetic privacy.

Way Forward

Legislative Action: Enact the DNA Technology Regulation Bill to establish a statutory profiling framework and privacy safeguards.
Capacity Building: Train investigators and forensic staff on custody protocols and handling techniques to minimise human error and contamination.
Lab Modernization: Augment Forensic Science Laboratories (FSL) with advanced technology for rapid analysis and develop a national DNA database for criminal tracking.
Judicial Training: Sensitise judges and prosecutors on the strengths and limitations of DNA evidence, preventing undue reliance or outright dismissal.
Oversight Authority: Establish an independent regulatory body to monitor DNA profiling, enforce ethical standards, and strengthen public trust.

As highlighted in the Justice Malimath Committee Report (2003), forensic evidence is the “bedrock of modern justice delivery.” Robust legal, procedural, and ethical safeguards are essential to ensure DNA evidence strengthens credibility and public trust.

Reference: The Hindu | PMFIAS: DNA Fingerprinting

PMF IAS Pathfinder for Mains – Question 348

Q. “The credibility of justice in India increasingly depends on the integrity of forensic evidence.” Critically examine the role of DNA technology in strengthening the criminal justice system, highlighting both opportunities and limitations. (250 Words) (15 Marks)

Approach

Introduction: Write a contextual introduction by mentioning the Devakar v. Tamil Nadu (2025) case.
Body: Examine opportunities and limitations in DNA technology in strengthening the criminal justice system and the way forward.
Conclusion: Emphasis on evidence-based practice in the criminal justice system by mentioning the Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010).