1.Supreme Court DNA Evidence Guidelines (Forensic Evidence)
What & Where
SC’s four-point procedural guidelines for DNA evidence management in criminal investigations
Origin: Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamil Nadu; judgment year 2025; applies pan-India
Standardises collection, 48-hour dispatch, sealed storage, continuous chain-of-custody
Quick Facts for MCQs
Legal & Policy
- Uniformity; overrides State policing differences via Article 142 power
- Enhances evidentiary value, curbs acquittals due to procedural lapses
- Non-compliance may invite adverse inference against prosecution
Forensic Process
- Sample packaged in tamper-proof containers with unique seal and documentation
- Refrigerated transport protects biological integrity, minimising degradation
- Register tracks movement till final court disposal or authorised destruction
Judicial Precedent
- Anil 2014 underscored lab quality control for admissibility
- Manoj 2022, Rahul 2022 show courts discard evidence with contamination risk
- New guidelines aim to pre-empt such rejection by codifying safeguards
Key Data Points
| Feature | Data-Point |
|---|---|
| Total procedural guidelines | 4 |
| Dispatch deadline | ≤48 hours to FSL |
| Case that triggered norms | Kattavellai @ Devakar v. Tamil Nadu (2025) |
| Mandatory package details | FIR, IPC sections, IO, medical officer, 2 witnesses |
| Re-opening sealed sample | Only with trial court permission |
| Chain-of-custody tool | Dedicated register signed at every handover |
| Delay explanation | Written reason by Investigating Officer |
| Preservation requirement | Refrigeration/approved medium until dispatch |
| Key precedent accepting DNA | Anil v. Maharashtra 2014 |
| Precedents rejecting DNA | Manoj v. MP 2022; Rahul v. Delhi 2022 |






