 We have been doing a series of webinars and in this endeavor, though not directly associated but CMR school of legal studies resource persons are one of the major constituents of sharing their knowledge on our platform. In that process, today we have Orvi Balgia, a teaching associate in CMR school of legal studies. Where will she take us to the deeper dives into the aspects of relevance of DNA evidence in criminal cases. We are glad that she has accepted the invite and that on a weekend. And I will ask her to take over the session. Thank you very much, sir. I'm first of all very much obliged for you to give me this opportunity to speak on such a platform. So first of all, I'd like to introduce myself. Actually, sir has already done it, but I just wanted to introduce myself. So I'm Orvi Balgia. I'm a teaching associate from CMR law college. So the reason I have chosen this topic is relevance of DNA in criminal cases is because it is one of my area of interest. So I have been doing research in this field and I've been planning to do my PhD also in this field, which is why I have chosen this topic. But before I start this topic, I would like to say that it is a very vast and challenging topic. So probably in this time of span given to me, I might not be able to cover each and everything, but how much is possible. I will definitely cover it and I will give you the few important aspects as to why DNA evidence is very relevant in conducting criminal crimes. So first and foremost, now that earlier, you know crime happened even before the dawn of civilization. So that time their crimes used to happen and there used to be age old methods wherein people used to detect who was the accused for such crime. But when the technology has developed every now and then technology develops. So when the technology develops, we have to walk with the technology. That is why even in criminal cases, technology has been introduced and DNA is considered as one of the most important tool in forensic science. So now for example, what happens is if we have seen any such case, right? Where you may not able to understand or we're not able to realize who the person is, who the person has been killed or who is the body, what is the body which we have found. So in that case, we cannot use the age old method by to find who is the actual person. So here DNA plays a very important role. So DNA is such an advanced technique wherein if there is an unidentified body, we could take the DNA from that body and we could find out who that person is, right? So in every country, there will be a DNA system. So here there is a system known as CODIS, okay, combined DNA index system which has the DNA of each and every person and it is kind of a database. So if you want to compare the DNA of any such person, you will have to compare it with the CODIS system. So here DNA as we all know, I'm not getting too much in the scientific term, but DNA as we all know, we can call it as a general blueprint of a man. So every man or woman will have a different type of DNA, not everyone's DNA will be same. So based on that DNA, we categorize the person as a unique person. But when it comes to identical twins, the DNA is similar. That is where the DNA for inferencing science actually fails. So there you will have to use the age old methods with the investigation officers generally use. So DNA it has genes which is biologically inherited by us and it is always unique in each and every person. So when we use the DNA, it is very much relevant. I can give you another example of how it is relevant. So for example, if you have to identify DNA in sexual assault cases. So the CRPC, it gives you a overview of how these DNA evidences can be collected. But there is no strong legislation regarding how the DNA has to be collected. So section 53 of CRPC, I'll get to it in detail, but I'm just giving a brief overview. So section 53 of CRPC says medical examination of a person. So here the police officer, when the person is accused of certain sexual assault crime. So under that section, the police officer can request a government medical officer to do the examination of such person. So examination can be through any means. First of all, maybe the blood of a person can be taken or maybe the hair strand of a person or maybe his hand nails or any such things. Based on this, evidences will be collected and then it will be matched with the traces found on the victim's body. And then we can easily find out whether or not that person has done such an act. Generally, in such cases, what happens is if you see on the face of it, you will never know whether such person has committed the act or not. But if DNA is brought into picture, it makes the work of an investigating officer plus the work of the court very easy to find out who the actual person is as in who is the accused person. So when you see DNA compared to other scientific evidences or compared to other human evidences like as though when a criminal case happens, the first thing we collect evidence is the FIR and the Mazar report, different various kinds of reports are collected. Compared to all these human evidences or the eyewitnesses here say evidence, whatever works in a criminal case, apart from that, scientific evidence gives you the easier way to find out whether that person has committed it or not. See generally in an investigation, when it happens, the first thing is you need to receive an FIR. So as soon as you receive an FIR in case of any cognisable offense, the first thing the police officer will do, they will go to the spot in order to investigate. And when the investigation happens, the police officer will find out whether there were any person who witnessed this kind of act happening or the person who called the police officer that such body is lying here or such act has happened. Then the police officer will make a panchnama wherein he will take 5 witnesses, then he will make the spot mahasar and then he will call each and every witness who is related to the case for giving their statement in the police station. So when all these processes happens, it takes a very long time. Though there is limitation in CRPC for conducting an investigation, but yet sometimes in certain cases these... Ma'am, you will have to re-log the screen has frozen. Ma'am, you will have to re-log. She is just joining back. I am really sorry for the technical glitch. So yes, as I was saying with the relevance of DNA, so how you can collect DNA. So when DNA has to be collected, it can be done through various sources. So it can be done through blood, hair strands, so as I told you. So how this happens is when through any means or any source a DNA is collected, chemically it is cut into various fragments and they have some kind of chemical solution to that or they have some kind of chemical formula which they use and then they match the DNA of that with the victims, with the traces found on the victims body. So that is how generally DNA is done. So now coming to the relevance of DNA, so there are many cases that has happened or there are many talks going on about whether DNA as a forensic evidence should be included in the law. So here first and foremost, as we know our constitution provides us a right, a fundamental right, correct. Under article 20 clause 3 that is right against self-information, which means that if a person has been accused of some crime, then the constitution protects him saying that you are not required to give any statement against yourself which can incriminate you for that case. So a person can actually keep quiet if he feels that the whatever answer he's about to give or whatever statement is about to make can probably incriminate him in the particular case. So this is also known as fifth amendment right in the US. So in the US if when you are under trial or when you're sitting for a chief or cross examination, if you're not wanting to answer any such question, right. A person can say I exercise my fifth amendment right. So similarly here under the constitution article 20 clause 3 provides protection for that person not to incriminate himself and here article 20 clause 3 also includes scientific techniques like DNA, brain mapping, polygraph, fingerprinting. So all this is also included because generally what happens here when you are taking the DNA of a person or when you're doing such scientific methods like brain mapping, polygraph or anything as such you get instant result right and you can easily implicate the person if he is the one who has committed the crime. So here people the human rights have raised an objection saying that this is against the right to privacy again under article 21 and also this becomes against article 20 clause 3. So we have a very important case in the constitution that is Selvi versus state of Karnataka which says that these kinds of scientific methods are not to be used and if it is used it will be against article 20 clause 3 that is it will be the person is trying to incriminate himself. So when what happened was so in order to curb all this DNA was generally at the very beginning very much included in criminal trials and even before 1980s DNA was only used for scientific purpose that is in order to do some research or for scientific evidence but after 1980 it came into it slowly slowly came into the concept of law that is whether DNA can be used in criminal trials or not. So we have certain criminal laws that is we have CRPC we have evidence act CRPC and evidence act talks about DNA or about scientific method but it does not give a very strong legislation it just mentions how it has to be collected. So now when I am coming to CRPC section 53, 53A, 54 and 164A these are the four main sections which talks about how a medical examination of the accused of the arrested person and of the rape victim can be done. So now section 53 as I told you earlier it talks about the medical examination of a person who is accused of rape. So here what they do is that when a police officer feels that if this person has to be examined medically and based on the result we can implicate him in the case if the police officer has such a reason to do so then he can do so under section 53 and only a registered medical practitioner on the recommendation of the police officer to such person the accused can be taken and once medical examination is done that report has to be given to the investigating officer and he will forward it to the magistrate. So here if only if the police feels that yes he if we do his medical examination he can be implicated in this case then in that case section 53 is applicable but with the amendment also that is section 53A which came in the CRPC amendment act of 2005 which said that medical examination of an arrested person. So what is the difference here in section 53 and 53A? So under section 53A it talks about arrested person whereas section 53 talks about a person who is accused of a sexual assault crime. So when the arrested person is brought before the police officer is taken into custody he can request for a medical examination to the police officer. This was done with an intent so that the accused even though he has committed the crime we have this policy or we follow this rule that innocent until proven guilty. So unless and until he is proven guilty he is considered innocent so all the rights all the benefits which the law provides should be given to the person irrespective of whatever crime has been instituted against him. So here what happens in 53A? He can request for a medical examination and once that medical examination is done then the report will be sent to the magistrate and every 48 hours this kind of medical examination can be done at the request of arrested person because sometimes what happens is when a person is taken into custody probably in the first medical examination he will be treated well but as soon as he is kept for many days in police custody maybe the police can treat him in not such a good way maybe they can give him any sort of torture that is why the right is given to the accused that every 48 hours he can ask for a medical examination So here 53 and 53A talks about basically the 53A talks about the rights of an accused that every 48 hours he has a right to get medical examination. Next coming to section 54 so you can see in 53 and 53A that it only talks about collecting of evidence through medical needs but it does not strongly focus or give a strong legislation about how DNA is relevant in this section Now coming to section 54 So section 54 talks about TIP that is Test Identification Parade So you know how test identification parade is done So if for example there are more than 5 or 10 accused and a person being a witness has seen the accused from a far distance So that time what the defence lawyer will do is that in order to protect this client he will say that the witness is not reliable because the distance between the accused and the witness was very far and I don't think the witness has actually seen the accused in that way So then what the magistrate or the court will do is that under TIP under section 54 they will call the witness to the police station and make sure that the witness identifies the accused So the accused will be made to stand in one line and everyone will almost look similar so that the witness reliability can be ascertained So if she selects the right person who is accused of that crime then it is very much efficient but for example if she selects any person who is not at all related to the crime then there creates a problem that whether this witness is reliable or not So if the person is a blind person or if the person cannot understand or cannot feel anything or cannot see anything then in that case there is another method of doing and when this TIP is done it will be recorded and it should be done in the presence of a magistrate So here also you can see that section 54 just talks about identification of the accused which can be accurate which may not be accurate but here there is no much mention of DNA So if the DNA of all the 10 people were taken during that time and it was checked in the court that is the DNA system then it would have been easily known that who is the person who has committed the crime The hassle of going through this whole TIP process wasting 2 or 3 days would have been reduced So here also in section 54 DNA evidence is not given much of importance they have just made a mention Now coming to section 164A 164A talks about medical examination of the victim of rape So when a girl has been raped or a woman has been raped the first thing is she has to get medically examined within 48 hours and how the medical examination has to be done First of all when the girl comes to the hospital that is a government hospital to get her medically examined first thing is she needs to give her consent whether she is ready to get medically examined or not So here unless she gives her consent the doctor cannot medically examine her it goes against section 164A If she has said yes then the doctor can proceed with the medical examination So first thing is the consent Once consent is received the second thing is the doctor will ask the particulars of the victim that is her name, her age Then other such particulars that how it happened Then whether any marks on the body of the accused when you are forced or do you have any such injury and do you have any relation with the accused or he was some unknown person to you So all these sensitive questions will be asked and then she will be asked to go and get herself medically examined and all the injuries that are on her body, her hand and all the semen traces will be found out and it will be compared with the suspect of rape If it does not match then it is completely ruled out and it exonerates the person from this case Then if there is no other suspect with whom the investigation officer can compare then what he does is he will go to the police He will ask a forensic expert or a forensic lab where the database is there to compare this data and that data and find out who could be the possible person with whom DNA matches So generally DNA does not match just like that because every person has a unique DNA So if the DNA is matched it means that that person has committed the crime For section 164A talks about that under CRPC So here also you can see that it just talks about how evidence has to be collected and how it has to be given to the investigating officer But here it does not talk about the relevance of DNA again So that is why CRPC or Evidence Act does not clearly give you the picture about how relevant DNA is Also the constitution says that it goes against article 20 clause 3 and article 21 So here there is a lot of negative response when it comes to relevance of DNA in criminal trial Now coming to the second act that is Indian Evidence Act So we know that in Indian Evidence Act there are two different topics that is relevancy and admissibility So here relevancy and admissibility are two different things A fact or any such evidence can be relevant in for the case But then when you take it to the court of law it might not be admissible So here DNA also if a DNA evidence is taken of a person and it is found out that person has committed It is a relevant fact under Evidence Act that this DNA is very relevant But when it comes to submitting in court it need not necessarily be admissible Because here the court also considers that even though it is a relevant fact or a relevant evidence the way the evidence was obtained also matters So here there are certain procedures for collecting DNA So if that procedure is not followed by the investigating officer and also by the forensic expert Then even if it is a relevant evidence it will not be admissible in court of law So that is why here even that is why there is a difference between relevancy and admissibility Now for example some unknown person who is not related to the case He gets certain evidence which is a relevant evidence But the court may or may not accept it because that person who brought the evidence Was not through proper means So here also relevancy of DNA depends upon how you collect the evidence Whether it is according to the proper procedure and the way you should collect it If it is not then it is never admissible in the court of law So here also when you consider relevancy there are certain factors Just because it makes the investigation easier or to find the person who is accused of the crime easier Does not mean the court will accept each and every DNA evidence that is relevant So here also in this case if you see article 20 clause 3 is protected Article 21 is also protected So anything if we go according to the law and the procedure Anything we do and we get the evidence that is always admissible in the court of law So here in evidence section 45 basically talks about expert opinion So here who is an expert? So expert is a person who has knowledge in a particular field So as we have seen whenever there needs to be any expert advice or any expert opinion On certain matter relating to scientific evidence A person even though he is not a witness he will be called separately to the court And once he is called separately he will be considered as an expert And his opinion will be taken into consideration He need not be a witness to the case He need not be a anyone related to the case He is just an expert who is called by the court to give his advice on certain matters So now for example a case comes in front of the court relating to some scientific terms So that time neither the lawyer advocate nor the judge will able to understand what is the actual thing that has happened So here section 45 gives a chance for an expert to come before the court and give his evidence Or give his opinion So here also an expert's opinion can be relevant but whether or not it has to be admissible in the court of law It is again upon the discretion of the judge It is not specifically mentioned that if an expert has given his advice It has to be taken by the court of law Whatever is necessary, whatever the court feels is very relevant and can be admissible Which does not alter or go against the right of the accused That court can take into consideration But you can see here also in evidence except about expert opinion and scientific evidence There is no topic about whether DNA is relevant or not So here there was no act, no legislation as such in order to assess whether DNA is relevant or not relevant So what happened is in the year 2007 a bill was introduced So whatever I had told you regarding DNA the process of collecting such DNA is known as DNA profiling or DNA technique So DNA profiling is one of the most potent tool in a criminal trial And in order to give it more of relevance, 2007 there was a bill which was introduced But later on as usual there was certain criticisms against that bill and that was known as DNA profiling bill There are a lot of criticisms and people are not ready to accept as a society that DNA could be considered as a relevant evidence Which could be admissible because it goes against the constitutional principles Then what happened is they withdrew the bill of 2007 Then in the year 2012 again such bill was introduced DNA profiling bill was introduced Again there were certain criticisms, they changed certain clauses or whatever was added in the bill There were various criticisms, then again they had to withdraw So this kept on happening because people or the law was not able to accept that DNA could be the best and most useful source of finding or the culprit It went on 2007, 2012, then 2019 So 2019 bill was also introduced that is the DNA profiling uses and techniques bill Which basically is told about how DNA has to be collected What is the relevance of that DNA and what procedure has to be followed in order to make such DNA admissible in the court of law Then there were certain criticisms, so as I was reading about this bill I saw the parliament discussions or debates happening and there were certain objections raised that we have no issues if DNA becomes a tool for scientific evidence or in criminal cases But when the constitution gives you certain rights, we expect that this bill or such acts if you have to introduce it should go in accordance with the constitution So we know constitution is our, we can say it is our Bible for the law makers So whatever law is made, it is made out of the constitution So any laws CRPC for that matter, evidence for that matter, IPC for that matter So we have to adhere to the principles of the constitution and then prepare such laws So the arguments placed was that if DNA act has to be passed in order to make it admissible in all cases It has to go in accordance with the constitutional principles That is it should not go against article 20 clause 3 and it should not go against article 21 But here what we tend to forget is such rights that is fundamental rights are not absolute rights So just because fundamental right is given to a person, we cannot say that I have got the absolute right I will not say anything that will incriminate me So that is the general notion of people But constitutional whatever fundamental rights are given, that is not at all an absolute right It comes with certain reasonable restrictions Alright, so here also when such arguments were made that it has to be within the constitutional principles Only then it can be admissible No, you have to make sure that when DNA evidence has to be relevant The procedure that is followed in collecting such DNA should also be according to law Okay, so there are various kinds of DNA that is you have touched DNA, you have DNA through blood, everything So touch DNA here needs Now for example there is a crime scene And if you all have seen when a crime scene happened as advocates, when you go to the crime spot For example to assess what has actually happened We see certain forensic experts trying to find out evidences from various things that are placed in the house They use this brush up, they use certain powder in order to find out the fingerprints Or any such evidence Similarly touch DNA means that even if you are sitting somewhere or you're walking or anything If your footprints are there in that place or when you touch a table or anything Your fingerprints will automatically come on that thing And when you touch that thing, your fingerprints automatically come Then the forensic expert can find out the fingerprint through that thing You don't need the person to be present there physically Even the thing is sufficient in order to find out whether there is any fingerprint Or whether there is any such evidence that is known as touch DNA Okay, and it is the most to be considered It can be considered the most popular one But here also there is a loophole What happens is that When multiple people touch the same thing, for example in the crime scene Multiple people touch, there is a vase placed in the house Multiple people touch that, who live in the house or who have come from outside Or who have, you know, some guests or everything So when they touch this vase, their fingerprints also come Then how will you assess who is the suspect of that crime So that is why the touch DNA though it was considered as the most easiest way of assessing But it is considered also as the most unpopular way because it creates a lot of loopholes Where you will not be able to find out who is the actual person who has done the crime So that is where touch DNA fails in its aspects But when you come to collecting of DNA evidence through other sources It won't fail in that aspect Because when you collect the sample from the person And then when you take it to the forensic lab for assessing You will get accurate results Right, so if you have done it through the proper procedure Then I can tell you DNA is very much relevant in criminal cases Because with the change in technology The types of crimes that are happening are also changing There are various kinds of crimes which are happening beyond the technology That is people use so much of technology that if we are one step behind And we use age old techniques We will not be able to find out who is the accused That is why DNA is very much relevant in order to be in par with technology Right, so here there were a lot of criticisms against making DNA relevant But then in the year 2022 an act was passed Okay, regarding DNA an act was passed And it is not very much enforced yet People have not implemented yet But then this act brought a very major change in the concept of DNA evidence in criminal cases So this act of 2022 basically talks about Okay Basically talks about how DNA has to be collected What is the relevance of such DNA And here they have increased the ambit or the scope of such DNA They have said that not only blood or semen or other such DNA will be used But also retina scans Right, fingerprinting All such DNA also will be used in this kind of act This act is named as criminal procedure identification act of 2022 So this act is with the objective of properly recording the physical and biological evidences So as I told you it not only focuses on the sample of the accused But also it gives importance to biometric evidences like when you have your retina scanned Or when you put your fingerprint or any such things So it has increased the scope So here the person who regulates the DNA database under this act is the National is the NCB, I'm sorry is the NCB Okay, the National Bureau, they are the people who handle this database And they have full access to this database So what this organization does is that the act provides up to 75 years the data can be stored So multiple people, population is very huge, multiple people will be there Multiple data will be inserted in that system So the NCRB is the only authority or only statutory body which has the right to handle this kind of database And if necessary also delete the DNA from such database Here why the option of delete is given So now let me give you an example If a person has been accused of a crime and the trial goes on His DNA evidence is collected, it is spread into the database, everything is done But later on it is found out that this person is not guilty, he is an innocent person That time the act gives an opportunity to NCRB that when a person is considered innocent There is no point of his DNA being there in the database Because it can lead to a threat to his privacy So you can see in this act also, they have mentioned that if a person is not convicted of the crime If he is let out as innocent, then his data has to be deleted And that data can only be deleted by this NCRB body So here the act gives very specific instructions Only the person who is convicted their database will be there But those who are innocent and let out their database could be deleted in order to protect their privacy So we know that in technology here what happens is Certain whenever we login into any app or maybe any such website They will collect our personal data And when they collect our personal data, they get to know our personal things and that causes a threat to privacy So there was no act prior which deals with data protection There are many international conventions which deals with data protection But when it comes to India or Indian law, there was no such act So recently in the year 2023 an act was introduced regarding data protection So in this data protection it was said that how data has to be stored And till what period data can be stored, whose data can be stored and how it has to be managed So with this 2022 identification act and data protection act You can see that we are progressing with the technology And we are making sure that laws are so stringent that we can make such DNA evidence relevant in criminal cases So there are certain provisions in this act which says that In order to identify such criminal offenders, it includes mechanisms for evaluating biological evidence So this act not only tells you for what period you can keep the DNA data Not only when can you delete and which DNA data is relevant But it also tells you the procedure how it has to be collected Here I can give you another example. So if there is a murder weapon lying next to the dead body It can be a knife, it can be a bottle, it could be anything Now when the police officer or the forensic expert is collecting that particular murder weapon How should the police officer or the forensic expert collect it? So if it is a knife, when the accused had stabbed the victim He will hold the handle of the knife. So whenever the knife has to be picked You should not hold it with bare hands. You should either have some kind of towel or any tissue in your hand With which you pick and put it in the plastic cover Similarly bottle also Where the person has held the bottle, apart from that any other part of the bottle you can hold With a tissue or a handkerchief and then place it in the plastic cover You can place it in that and you can mark it as an evidence So this is how evidence has to be collected When you collect such physical evidences which is the main thing of a crime, the main murder weapon You have to make sure your finger print or any of your touch DNA or any such thing does not come on that knife Because if that is so, it is very difficult to assess who is the suspect or who is the accused Who has done the crime because when you get multiple DNAs, you are not able to understand who has committed the crime So that is why this Act of 2022 basically tells you about how you have to collect the evidence The certain mechanism which you have to follow, what is the relevance of DNA And secondly for how long you can keep it and how you have to maintain such records So that privacy will not be affected of that particular person And since there was no legislative framework for collecting, evaluating and keeping such biological samples and DNA This kind of issue was also addressed by this 2022 Act So as I told you earlier, I cannot explain like each and every provision because it is going to take a very very long time So I am giving you the relevant things what was mentioned in these sections and these acts So even though 2022 Act is enacted, implementation of such Act as such has not been made regressive It might be there, I am not saying it is not there but like how we follow CRPC, how we follow evidence, how we follow IPC This Act has not been followed in that much of importance And now coming to my opinion about how relevant this DNA in criminal cases is So apart from the law or apart from a legal perspective, I would just want to say that If something can be done in an easy manner, why go the hard way So here also when technology is improving, is enhancing We also need to go in part with the technology in order to find out such criminal cases that happens So instead of using the age old techniques and going through the long process, filing so many documents, evidences, etc If one single thing can prove the case, then why not go for it But provided that you follow all the rules and regulations of how it has to be collected, how it has to be maintained And only then the court will admit such evidences It is not that the court has never admitted DNA evidences The court can even give you permission for doing, for undergoing scientific methods like brain mapping, like polygraph, finger printing, DNA profiling So all these things can be done The court has given certain decisions wherein the court has approved certain techniques Because it felt that it was very much relevant and such technique could be admissible in the court of law So whenever you are doing other kinds of scientific evidences like brain mapping, polygraph, or any narco analysis, you just cannot conduct the test First of all, you need to seek the permission of the court Only if the magistrate has signed or has given consent for such technique Then the police officer can go ahead with such technique And then the results of such technique shall be given back to the magistrate So here also there is a way, in the sense the way you have to ask questions The way you have to treat the person, no matter if it is the accused, you have to treat him in a very good way So all these aspects you have to keep in mind and then go for the scientific evidence and produce it before the court So unless and until you follow something properly as per the law, nothing under the law can be admissible So even if you do not follow the procedure of filing an FIR, or you do not follow the procedure of filing a charge sheet Then the court will not accept it So even if there is a procedure, you need to follow it You cannot say that you cannot be a person of your own will You cannot do anything according to your wins and fancies So this act does not give you the proper or absolute power that you can collect DNA anyhow you want And it will be admissible in court of law No, that is not the case at all So here if DNA is collected by the person, that is the investigating officer and the expert There is a mechanism which is mentioned in this act that they have to go through Okay and here when such DNA evidence has to be done The burden of proof basically falls upon the prosecution So here the prosecution needs to convince the court Why do they need to conduct a DNA test in order to find out who is the accused So here when the burden of proof is upon the prosecution, he has to prove Then the defense can argue saying that it is not relevant because when there is proper evidence why you have to go for DNA Here it's clearly said my client is not at all related to this case So all these things will come up But when there is documentary evidence which on the face of it proves that the person has committed the crime Then why do you have to go for DNA? So this is also another drawback in the law When it comes to sexual assault cases, when it comes to cases like you find certain mutilated remains of a person Then definitely DNA is the only thing which can save the victim and which can give justice to the victim But apart from that, any other case When there is solid proof or when there is prima facie proof Then why do you even need to go for DNA would be the question So here DNA is only relevant in cases where it is very much needed and provided you follow all the laws and procedures But here also DNA is not only relevant in criminal cases, it can be relevant in civil cases also For example DNA in case of paternity and maternity disputes So even in civil cases for example if there is any dispute and then there comes a question That this person is not eligible to get my property because he is not my father, he is not my mother You can say that thing When it comes before the court as a challenge, even in such cases DNA can be used So deciding maternity and paternity disputes can be used It also comes under section 125 of CRPC when it comes to maintenance So here DNA is relevant in each and every case Now apart from criminal and civil Whether DNA will be applicable when any cases come based on immigration issues So immigration issues when such case comes For example there are certain illegal immigrants who want to enter And immigration issues happen There is a whole family or something as such Where in there comes a scenario that the person is not able to figure out the relation between the people There also DNA could be used And this is what is mentioned not in this act I am saying but as a general which I have come across So DNA not only in criminal in civil in any other issue And also in criminal issue it is very much relevant But there is always a but in law that you have to follow all the procedure as mentioned under the law So here I have covered about CRPC about evidence and about various other bills which says that Though medical examination is allowed collecting of evidence is allowed but a strong legislation had to be passed That is why this 2020 sorry 2022 act was passed And then it gave a very broad scope or it increased the ambit of DNA evidence So here this act extends or expands the scope of collected data to include biometrics Right retina scans, palm prints, then iris scan, imprint so all such thing whatever is related to biometric It could be used as a DNA evidence in the criminal trial And also behavioral attributes, so what do you mean by behavioral attributes So it could be maybe handwriting, it could be signature, it could also be incorporating of voice So now you know that everywhere if you are aware with the Instagram things that are happening around That AI generated voices are being created Like you can easily copy the voice of any famous personality and then you can put anything on social media So here also what happens is AI generated voices is also a kind of DNA which comes under the scope of section Sorry of the act 2022 So here also there is a threat to privacy Right so when such voices are being copied or generated There is a threat of privacy to the person and anything could be put before the social media So that is why keeping all these things in mind with the advancing technology With how the minds of the people work when it comes to technology This act has in just to be said this act has included all the possible DNA evidences through which it can be collected Right so here also this act allows for example the use of a person's handwriting as evidence in a case of reckless driving Okay so here even the handwriting of a person could be taken in case of reckless driving So DNA evidence can be collected in any manner I told you even if it's not related to the case If it is required if it could be admissible before the court of law Then yes DNA evidence is very very much relevant And keeping in all the CRPC provisions all the Indian Evidence Act provisions 53, 53A, 54, 164A of CRPC and section 45 of Evidence Act Right keeping in all these in mind you need to go with the 2022 act It should be in accordance and then also the Data Protection Act of 2023 As also need to be taken into consideration So here if you have adhered to all the provisions to all the procedures Then there is no stopping by any court to give admissibility to your DNA evidences Right so here it is a very vast topic about DNA as in there are many case laws or there are many circumstances Where in the court has accepted court has rejected DNA evidences So it is depending on the facts and circumstances of the case also So in such case there could be a debate like whether it is relevant or not So when I'm doing research in this like I just started my research And then when I'm doing research in such a thing it has given me a wider scope of thinking Whether DNA is relevant or not and as far as I have read I feel when you can go the easier way why you want to take the hard way And here also there are certain acts which will protect the person Which will protect the person's fundamental rights So keeping in mind all these acts that is all the CRPC, the Indian Evidence Act The 2022 Identification Act, the 2023 Data Protection Act Or Information Technology Act of 2008 And all the rules of IT Act, Information Technology Act of 2011 With all these rules combined if every procedure is followed DNA is very much relevant in criminal cases So here I have discussed whatever is possible Regarding relevance of DNA in criminal cases I have not mentioned a lot of case loss So because most of us have studied or when most of us are practicing Advocates we have come across such cases But as a teacher or as a teaching associate in CMR I just wanted to share my knowledge on this topic I hope I have conveyed certain important things in this lecture Which was my intention and since this is my area of interest And with Vikas sir giving me this opportunity And I would also like to thank the Dean of CMR Who has given me this opportunity to speak before this platform I thank you all for listening to me patiently And I also thank sir for giving me this opportunity So ma'am you have, it could show that you have done the deep Deeper understanding of those projects That's why everybody who was able to understand the things And we are quite sure that people will watch this video more And those who are not subscribed to the YouTube channel of Beyond Laws You'll see they can do it And we are thank you to Subramaniam sir To introduce such a good resource person Thank you everyone, stay safe, stay blessed And tomorrow we have a session with Justice Roshan Dalvi Thank you Thank you sir, thank you all