Paramesha vs State of Karnataka. Criminal Appeal 1959/2019 decided on 11 December 2020. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/357617/1/CRLA1959-19-11-12-2020.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 21. I am conscious of the fact that the DNA test is an impact of the modern scientific and technological revolution. No doubt this new technology can be used as an effective tool in crime detection. To prove the case of the prosecution, the DNA technology as is a latest tool of modern genetic science. Many courts not only in India, but even in United State have relied upon and accepted it as a admissible evidence. However by close reading of the material, the scientific result is going to be taken, the entire process of procuring the DNA evidence is controlled by human agencies i.e., Investigating Officer and the forensic scientist. There is ample chance of manipulation or tampering of such evidence by the Corrupt Officers or Scientist which needless to say highly prejudice the accused persons. Even preservation method adopted are not properly brought on record. Under such circumstances the prosecution has to establish the corroboration of such evidence and its truth. Nagappa V/s State of Karnataka reported in 2020(3) KCCR 1704 relied on.
22. Taking into consideration the decision quoted supra and on perusal of the evidence of the Investigating Officer it indicates that he has given reasons to PW.8 and PW.8 without following any information, has drawn the blood of the accused and has sent and even what is the method of preservation has also been not been followed as specifically deposed before the Court. even Scientific Officer has also not been examined before the Court. Under such circumstances the mere production of the report as per Ex.P14 will not help to the case of the prosecution to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 