Hon’ble Supreme Court while disposing off the
Criminal Appeal Dharamdeo Yadav vs State of U.P. (2014) 5 SCC 509 which relates
with the murder of Diana Routley a citizen of Newzeland who came to India as
tourist went to Varanasi and disappeared.
FIR was lodged and investigation started. During the investigation
accused were arrested and under section 27 Evidence Act , skeleton was
recovered. Since there was no eye witness to the seen of crime the whole case
was based on Circumstantial Evidence. In order to establish the identity of skeleton
of deceased Photo Super Imposition
Technique and DNA Fingerprinting
was used. Based on last seen theory ,
and other scientific and circumstantial
evidence the Supreme Court commuted the death sentence of accused into life imprisonment.
The
Hon’ble Supreme Court while emphasizing on the use of Modern Scientific
Techniques observed “
CRIME
SCENE MANAGEMENT
“Crime scene has to be
scientifically dealt with without any error. In criminal cases, especially
based on circumstantial evidence, forensic science plays a pivotal role, which
may assist in establishing the element of crime, identifying the suspect,
ascertaining the guilt or innocence of the accused. One of the major activities
of the Investigating officer at the crime scene is to make thorough search for
potential evidence that have probative value in the crime. Investigating
Officer may be guarded against potential contamination of physical evidence
which can grow at the crime scene during collection, packing and forwarding.
Proper precaution has to be taken to preserve evidence and also against any
attempt to tamper with the material or causing any contamination or damage.”
EXPERT SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
Criminal
Judicial System is this country is at cross-roads, many a times, reliable,
trustworthy, credible witnesses to the crime seldom come forward to depose
before the court and even the hardened criminals get away from the clutches of
law. Even the reliable witnesses for the prosecution turn hostile due to
intimidation, fear and host of other reasons. Investigating agency has,
therefore, to look for other ways and means to improve the quality of
investigation, which can only be through the collection of scientific evidence.
In
this age of science, we have to build legal foundations that are sound in
science as well as in law. Practices and principles that served in the past,
now people think, must give way to innovative and creative methods, if we want
to save our criminal justice system. Emerging new types of crimes and their
level of sophistication, the traditional methods and tools have become
outdated, hence the necessity to
strengthen the forensic science for crime detection.
Oral
evidence depends on several facts, like power of observation, humiliation,
external influence, forgetfulness etc., whereas forensic evidence is free from
those infirmities. Judiciary should also be equipped to understand and deal
with such scientific materials. Constant interaction of Judges with scientists,
engineers would promote and widen their knowledge to deal with such scientific
evidence and to effectively deal with criminal cases based on scientific
evidence. We are not advocating that, in all cases, the scientific evidence is
the sure test, but only emphasizing the necessity of promoting scientific
evidence also to detect and prove crimes over and above the other evidence.
Scientific
evidence encompasses the so-called hard science, such as physics, chemistry,
mathematics, biology and soft science, such as economics, psychology and
sociology. Opinions are gathered from persons with scientific, technical or
other specialized knowledge, whose skill, experience, training or education may
assist the Court to understand the evidence or determine the fact in issue.
Many a times, the Court has to deal with circumstantial evidence and scientific
and technical evidence often plays a pivotal role. Sir Francis Bacon, Lord
Chancellor of England, in his Magnum Opus put forth the first theory of
scientific method. Bacons view was that a scientist should be disinterested
observer of nature, collecting observations with a mind cleansed of harmful
preconceptions, that might cause error to creep into the scientific record.
Distancing themselves from the theory of Bacon, the US Supreme Court in Daubert
v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 509 U.S. 579 (1993) held as follows:-
Science
is not an encyclopedic body of knowledge about the universe. Instead, it
represents a process for proposing and refining theoretical explanations about
the world that are subject to further testing and refinement.
PHOTOGRAPHY SUPERIMPOSITION
Personal
Identification or Uniqueness of Individual:-
Superimposition
Technique:- for personal identification superimposition technique was done in
this case, for which photograph of face of alleged individual Diana Clare
Routley obtained from S.S.P. Varanasi (Ex.1) from which a black and white
photograph (Ex.2) was made the skull and mandible was fixed in best position
anatomical position and photograph of skull along with Mandible was taken
(Ex.3) by minutely adjusting same angle and distance from which photograph of
face (Ex.2) was taken.
The
negative of photograph (Ex.2) and negative of skull (Ex.3) was precisely
adjusted in stand in dark room for registration marks then sumporim posed
photograph was taken first partially exposing negative of photograph on photograph
paper then exposing negative of skull on the same photograph thus the
superimposed photograph (Ex.4) was obtained and registration marks and lines
were compared and was found that they matched and coincided exactly
establishing that the skull belonged to the photograph of the individual.
(Annexure Ex.1 to Ex. 4 for perusal).
Personal
Identification by comparison of Dental Records of alleged individual from
Dental findings of bones; Dental records of Diana Clare Routley (Ex.5) the
alleged individual was made available by S.S.P. Varanasi with the help of
Interpol services
(a)
in the lower jaw there was evidence eruption of III Molar both sides, but the
teeth were missing. The dental record shows that both the lower III Molar were
extracted on 8.3.1993
(b)
the upper III Molar both sides teeth was not present and no sign of eruption
was seen. The X-ray (Dental) (Ex.6) of Diana Clare Routely shows that both
upper III Molar were not erupted/impacted.
(c)
The examination of teeth and hair X-ray (taken in S.S.P.G. Hospital) (Report
Ex.6) shows that there are cavities and filling in the upper left II Molar,
upper right 1st Molar, lower left Molar and lower right II Molar, also small
cavity in the Ist Molar lower both sides. The dental chart (Ex.5) and Dental X-ray
(Ex.7) of Diana also show presence of cavity and fillings in these teeth. Thus
comparison of teeth and their X-ray with the dental and their X-ray records
from New Zealand of Diana completely establishes the identity of skull and
mandible of being Diana Clare Routley.
(d)
Blood group was detected from bones and was found Group-A. Medical report shows
Blood Group-A.
DNA FINGERPRINTING
We
are in this case concerned with the acceptability of the DNA report, the author
of which (PW21) was the Chief of DNA Printing Lab, CDFD, Hyderabad.
The
qualifications or expertise of PW21 was never in doubt. The method he adopted
for DNA testing was STR analysis. Post-mortem examination of the body remains
(skeleton) of Diana was conducted by Dr. C.B. Tripathi, Professor and Head of
Department of Forensic Medical I.M.S., B.H.U., Varanasi. For DNA analysis, one
femur and one humerus bones were preserved so as to compare with blood samples
of Allen Jack Routley. In cases where skeleton is left, the bones and teeth
make a very important source of DNA. Teeth, as often noticed is an excellent
source of DNA, as it forms a natural barrier against exogenous DNA
contamination and are resistant to environmental assaults.
The
blood sample of the father of Diana was taken in accordance with the set up
precept and procedure for DNA isolation test and the same was sent along with
taken out femur and humerus bones of recovered skeleton to the Centre for
D.N.A. Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Ministry of Science and
Technology, Government of India, Hyderabad. PW21, as already indicated,
conducted the DNA Isolation test on the basis of samples of blood of Routley
and femur and humerus bones of skeleton and submitted his report dated
28.10.1998. DNA Fingerprinting analysis was carried out by STR analysis and on
comparison of STR profile of Routley. When DNA profile of sample found at the
scene of crime matches with DNA profile of the father, it can be concluded that
both the samples are biologically the same
The
DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid, which is the biological blueprint of
every life. DNA is made-up of a double standard structure consisting of a deoxyribose
sugar and phosphate backbone, cross-linked with two types of nucleic acids
referred to as adenine and guanine, purines and thymine and cytosine
pyrimidines.
The
most important role of DNA profile is in the identification, such as an
individual and his blood relations such as mother, father, brother, and so on.
Successful identification of skeleton remains can also be performed by DNA
profiling. DNA usually can be obtained from any biological material such as
blood, semen, saliva, hair, skin, bones, etc.
The
question as to whether DNA tests are virtually infallible may be a moot
question, but the fact remains that such test has come to stay and is being
used extensively in the investigation of crimes and the Court often accepts the
views of the experts, especially when cases rest on circumstantial evidence.
More than half a century, samples of human DNA began to be used in the criminal
justice system. Of course, debate lingers over the safeguards that should be
required in testing samples and in presenting the evidence in Court. DNA
profile, however, is consistently held to be valid and reliable, but of course,
it depends on the quality control and quality assurance procedures in the
laboratory. Close relatives have more genes in common than individuals and
various procedures have been proposed for dealing with a possibility that true
source of forensic DNA is of close relative.
So far as this case is concerned,
the DNA sample got from the skeleton matched with the blood sample of the
father of the deceased and all the sampling and testing have been done by
experts whose scientific knowledge and experience have not been doubted in
these proceedings. We have, therefore, no reason to discard the evidence of
PW19, PW20 and PW21. Prosecution has, therefore, succeeded in showing that the
skeleton recovered from the house of the accused was that of Diana daughter of
Allen Jack Routley and it was none other than the accused, who had strangulated
Diana to death and buried the dead body in his house.
