Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Apex Court of India has proclaimed that if DNA Profiling is not done or held back from the Trial Court, the prosecution would face an adverse consequence. Besides, the Court said it did not suggest that in the absence of DNA profiling, the prosecution cannot prove its case. The Hon’ble Bench of the Supreme Court of India comprising Justice Madan. B. Lokur, Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Deepak Gupta highlighted the justification regarding the stand taken by them by relying on the observations made in the case of Rajendra PralhadraoWasnik Vs. State of Rajasthan.
In the Instant case, the DNA samples of the accused were taken for DNA profiling, the results of which, however, were not produced before the Trial Court. Relying on facts of the case, the serious-minded bench of the apex court stated that there was no explanation for non-production, and the absence of any justification for not producing the DNA evidence would cause jeopardy in upholding the sentence of death on the appellant.
The Court emphasized the significance of Section 53-A of the Cr.P.C. in the case by stating that although the provision is not mandatory in nature, the conclusion to be arrived at should be positive. Reasonable grounds must exist for forming a belief that the scrutiny of a person shall provide enough evidence related to the committing of the offence of rape or attempt to commit the offence.
Where there are reasonable grounds, section 53-A(2) of the Cr.P.C. requires a medical examination to be conducted including scrutinizing the accused and the material taken from him for DNA profiling. In other words, the court stated that in the absence of reasonable grounds or in the absence of evidence to the support the existence of such reasonable grounds in respect of committing the offence aforementioned, it is unlikely to even charge-sheet the accused for committing an offence of rape or attempt to rape.
Furthermore, the court said the technological advancements in forensic and scientific investigations should be made use of to the fullest level, and one must not stick to the archaic methods or techniques of investigations. Referring to similar judgements in the other cases, the Supreme Court said that the prosecution should resort to DNA profiling and must produce the same before the Trial Court or any other competent court, if any, to avoid adverse consequences. This advantage of DNA profiling is given to the prosecution side under section 53-A and Section 164-A of the Cr.P.C; and thus, the declination to produce DNA evidence would be inconsequential, especially when DNA Profiling can be done in India.
86540
103860
630
114
59824