Abstract

DNA evidence transformed forensic science by giving criminal trials an extremely precise method to connect people to crime scenes. DNA Profiling technology has made verdicts more dependable which results in effective prosecution and the release of innocent people who were previously convicted due to mishandling of the evidence. Though DNA evidence provides precise forensic results it retains inherent imperfections. Misinterpretation of results combined with sample contamination from improper conditions and collection errors can cause innocent people to be convicted which damages the credibility of the justice system. The research evaluated the scientific principles behind DNA evidence while analyzing how reliable forensic techniques are like Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and Short Tandem Repeat (STR) analysis function alongside their respective limitations. The investigation assesses the role of DNA evidence within judicial processes while analyzing the admissibility standards including the Daubert Standard in the USA alongside Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. DNA profiling has greatly improved criminal justice procedures although concerns about its improper application persist. The study presents an evaluation of wrongful convictions caused by flawed forensic analysis that stresses the importance of strong procedural rules alongside judicial expertise and ethical protections. The research indicates that regulatory frameworks must be established to maximize forensic DNA evidence benefits while minimizing related errors and privacy.

• 1.   Mukesh &Anr. V. State for NCT of Delhi &Ors., (2017) 6 SCC 1 (India)
• 2.   Andrews v. State, 533 so. 2d 841 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
• 3.   Rahul v. State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs &Anr., (2022) 9 SCR 1129 (India).
• 4.   Alec Jeffreys, DNA Profiling: The Pioneer’s Perspective, 354 Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 5 (1999).
• 5.   Itiel E. Dror & Greg Hampikian, Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation, 51 Sci. & Just. 204 (2011).
• 6.   National Institute of Justice, DNA Forensics: Expanding Uses and Information Sharing, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, NCJ 205475 (2005).
• 7.   Kary B. Mullis, The Unusual Origin of the Polymerase Chain Reaction, 56 Sci. Am. 56 (1990).
• 8.   John M. Butler, Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers 147 (2d ed. 2005).
• 9.   People v. Simpson, No. BA097211 (Cal. Super. Ct. Oct. 3, 1995).
• 10.   Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
• 11.   Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, Act No. 47 of 2023, § 39.
• 12.   National Research Council, The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence 192 (1996).
• 13.   S and Marper v. United Kingdom, App. Nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, 48 Eur. H.R. Rep. 50 (2008).
• 14.   Forensic DNA Databases and Privacy Issues, Edinbox, https://edinbox.c o m / c o u n c i l / f o r e n s i c - s c i e n c e s -g f s e c / 2 3 3 1 - f o r e n s i c - d n a - d a t a b a s e s -
• 15.   Sonia M. Suter, All in the Family: Privacy and DNA Familial Searching, 23 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 309 (2010), available at http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v23/23HarvJLTech309.pdf.
• 16.   Ankit Srivastava et al., Impact of DNA Evidence in Criminal Justice System: Indian Legislative Perspectives, 12 Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences 51 (2022), available at https://ejfs.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41935-022-00309-y.
• 17.   R v. Doheny & Adams, [1996] EWCA Crim 728, [1997] 1 Cr. App. R. 369 (Court of Appeal), available at https://vlex.co.uk/vid/r-vdoheny-792775641
• 18.   People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d 417, 633 N.E.2d 451, 611 N.Y.S.2d 97 (1994), available at https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/1994/83-n-y-2d-417-0.html
• 19.   Santosh Kumar Singh v. State through CBI, (2010) 9 SCC 747, available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/760449/.
• 20.   Mitochondrial DNA, State of Tennessee v. Paul Ware, No. 103 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001),available at https://www.promega.com/-/media/files/resources/profiles-in-dna/103/mitochondrial-dna-state-of-tennessee-v-paulware.pdf?la=en.
• 21.   Jacob Kaplan, Shichun Ling & Maria Cuellar, Public Beliefs About the Accuracy and Importance of Forensic Evidence in the United States, 60 SCI. & JUST. 263, 263-72 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.01.001.
• 22.   Ate Kloosterman, Marjan Sjerps& Astrid Quak, Error Rates in Forensic DNA Analysis: Definition, Numbers, Impact and Communication, 12 Forensic Sci. Int’l: Genetics 77, 77-85 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2014.04.014.
• 23.   Ray A. Wickenheiser, The Value of Forensic DNA Leads in Preventing Crime and Eliminating the Innocent, 3 Forensic Sci. Int’l: Synergy 100201, 100201 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100201
• 24.   Forensic Science Simplified, Principles of DNA, https://www.forensicsciencesimplified.org/dna/principles.html#:~:text=Inside%20the%20nucleus%2C%20there20are,have%20the%20same%20autosomal%20DNA (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 25.   National Center for Biotechnology Information, Introduction to Forensic DNA Analysis, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK232606/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 26.   J. Watherston, D. McNevin, M.E. Gahan, D. Bruce & J. Ward, Current and Emerging Tools for the Recovery of Genetic Information from Post Mortem Samples: New Directions for Disaster Victim Identification, 37 Forensic SCI. INT’L: Genetics 270, 270-82 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.08.016.
• 27.   National Human Genome Research Institute, Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), https:// www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Polymerase-Chain-Reaction-PCR (last visited
• 28.   J.M. Butler, Short Tandem Repeat Typing Technologies Used in Human Identity Testing, 43 Biotechniques Sii, Sii-Sv (2007),h t t p s : / / w w w . t a n d f o n l i n e . c o m / d o i /full/10.2144/000112582.
• 29.   Adrian Linacre, Duncan Taylor & Caitlin McDonald, A Comprehensive Review of DNA Barcoding Techniques, 15 Genes 438 (2024), https://doi.org/10.3390/genes15040438.
• 30.   Ayush Chauhan, Types of PCR, FLABSLIS, https://flabslis.com/blogs/types-of-pcr (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 31.   M. Upadhyay, P. Shrivastava, K. Verma et al., Recent Advancements in Identification and Detection of Saliva as Forensic Evidence: A Review, 13 Egypt J. Forensic Sci. 17 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-023-00336-3.
• 32.   SK. Alketbi, Emerging Technologies in Forensic DNA Analysis, 1 Perspectives In Legal & Forensic Sci. 10007 (2024), https://doi.org/10.70322/plfs.2024.10007.
• 33.   Nimrat Khehra, Inderbir S. Padda & Cathi J. Swift, Forensic Toxicology, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK589663/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 34.   Terry Taylor, What Is STR Analysis?, National Institute of Justice, https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-str-analysis (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 35.   J. González-Bao et al., Performance Comparison of a Previously Validated MicrohaplotypePanel and a Forensic STR Panel for DNA Mixture Analysis, 74 Forensic Sci. Int’l:
• 36.   FBI, CODIS, https://le.fbi.gov/science-andlab/biometrics-and-fingerprints/codis-2 (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 37.   AZoLifeSciences, How Accurate is DNA Evidence?, https://www.azolifesciences.c o m / a r t i c l e / H o w - A c c u r a t e - i s - D N A -Evidence.aspx#:~:text=Contamination%20and%20Sample%20Degradation,DNA%20samples%20collected%20before%20analysis (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 38.   Hayden B. Baldwin & Cheryl Puskarich May, Crime Scene Contamination Issues, Crime Scene Investigator, https://www.crime-sceneinvestigator.net/crime-scene-contaminationissues.html (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 39.   Ibid.
• 40.   AZoLifeSciences, Reducing Contamination in Forensic Investigations, https://www.azolifesciences.com/article/ReducingContamination-in-Forensic-Investigations.
• 41.   Emmanuel Milot, Simon Baechler & Frank Crispino, Must the Random Man Be Unrelated? A Lingering Misconception in Forensic Genetics, 2 Forensic Sci. Int’l: Synergy
• 42.   Ibid.
• 43.   Mondaq, The Role and Admissibility of Forensic Evidence in the Indian Criminal Justice System, https://www.mondaq.com/india/crime/1469694/the-role-and-admissibilityof-forensic-evidence-in-the-indian-criminaljustice-system (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 44.   Francesco Sessa, Cristoforo Pomara, Massimiliano Esposito, Patrizia Grassi, Giuseppe Cocimano& Monica Salerno, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10742555/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 45.   Ibid.
• 46.   National Institute of Justice, Wrongful Convictions and DNA Exonerations: Understanding the Role of Forensic Science, https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/wrongful-convictions-anddna-exonerations-understanding-role-forensicscience (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 47.   Australian Law Reform Commission, Reliability of DNA Evidence, in Essentially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic Information In Australia, Alrc Report 96, https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/essentially-yours-the-protection-of-humangenetic-information-in-australia-alrc-report-96/44-criminal-proceedings/reliability-ofdna-evidence/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 48.   John Morgan, Wrongful Convictions and Claims of False or Misleading Forensic Evidence, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15233 (last visited Mar.
• 49.   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2303592120 (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 50.   National Center for Biotechnology Information, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK232602/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 51.   Dr. Pratibha Tiwari, Challenges and Solutions in DNA Fingerprinting: Sample Quality, Data Analysis, and Interpretation, https://www.biochemjournal.com/archives/2024/
• 52.   Ashish Badiye, Neeti Kapoor & Ritesh G. Menezes, The Chain of Custody in Forensic Science, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/b o o k s / N B K 5 5 1 6 7 7 / # : ~ : t e x t = T h e % 2 0chain%20of%20custody%20is,custody%20or%20chain%20of%20evidence (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 53.   Eva AluvaalaNambati et al., Multidisciplinary Approach Towards Training of the Next Generation of Forensic DNA Analysts in Africa: A Kenyan Perspective, 2 Forensic Sci.
• 54.   National Institute of Standards and Technology, https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2024/NIST.IR.8503.pdf (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 55.   Grette Titus, The Role and Importance of DNA Evidence in the Indian Criminal Justice System, 17 Indian J. Forensic Med. & Toxicology 30, 30-35 (2023), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377560476_The_Role_and_Importance_of_DNA_Evidence_in_the_Indian_Criminal_Justice_System/citation/download.
• 56.   Legal Information Institute, Daubert Standard, Cornell Law School, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/daubert_standard (last visited Mar.30, 2025).
• 57.   Ibid.
• 58.   Faro, Daubert in Detail, https://www.faro.com/en/Resource-Library/Article/Daubertin-Detail (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 59.   Patrons Legal, DNA Profiling in Civil and Criminal Matters: Constitutional Aspects, https://patronslegal.com/b l o g s / d n a - p r o f i l i n g - i n - c i v i l - a n d -c r i m i n a l - m a t t e r s - c o n s t i t u t i o n a l -aspects/#:~:text=POSITION%20IN%20 INDIA:,21%20of%20the%20Constitution (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 60.   Casemine, Kumho Tire v. Carmichael: Extending Daubert's Reliability Standards to Technical and Specialized Testimony, https://www.casemine.com/commentary/us/kumhotire-v.-carmichael:-extending-daubert'sreliability-standards-to-technical-andspecialized-testimony/view#:~:text=This%20
• 61.   Anjelica Cappellino, Admitting Expert Testimony Under the Frye Standard: The Ultimate Guide, https://www.expertinstitute.com/resources/insights/admitting-experttestimony-under-the-frye-standard-theultimate-guide/ (last visited Mar. 30, 2025).
• 62.   Jeevan Shekar, The Admissibility of Scientific Evidence in Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and the Need for an Indian Daubert, SSRN (Aug. 11, 2024), https://ssrn.com/
• 63.   Ibid.
• 64.   Chatrapal Singh, DNA Technology in Criminal Investigation in India, J. Emerging Techs. & Innovative Research, Sept. 2024, at 719, available at https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2409382.pdf.
• 65.   Nidhi N. Anand, Media Trial in India and Case Analysis of Priyadarshini Mattoo Case with Respect to Media Trial, Indian J. Integrated Research in Law, May 2022, at 1,
• 66.   Chandrabhan SudamSanap v. State of Maharashtra, Crim. App. No. 879 of 2019 (Supreme Court of India Jan. 28, 2025), available at https://www.sci.gov.in/sci-get-pdf/?diary_no=133162019&type=j&order_date=2025-01-28&from=latest_judgements_order.
• 67.   Appeal No. 1111 of 2015, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Dec. 20, 2018, available at https://www.shadesofknife.in/wpcontent/uploads/2018/12/The-State-ofMaharastra-Vs-Chandrabhan-Sudam-Snapon-20-December-2018.pdf.
• 68.   National Research Council (US) Committee on DNA Forensic Science: An Update, The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence (National Academies Press 1996), available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK232607/.
• 69.   State of Gujarat v. Kishanbhai, (2014) 1 SCC 108, available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/24057125/.
• 70.   Surendra Koli v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2011) 4 SCC 80, available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/659859/.
• 71.   Ibid.
• 72.   Dr. Himanshu Pandey & Ms. Anhita Tiwari, Evidential Value of DNA: A Judicial Approach, Bharati Law Review, Jan.–Mar. 2017, available at https://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/upload/bf936e7d-4211-4ae4-9bd7-3d721a8e424c.pdf.
• 73.   Shichun Ling, Jacob Kaplan & Colleen M. Berryessa, The Importance of Forensic Evidence for Decisions on Criminal Guilt, Science & Justice, 61(2):142–149 (2021), https://
• 74.   Angi M. Christensen, Nicholas V. Passalacqua & Eric J. Bartelink, Chapter 14: Personal Identification, in Forensic Anthropology 443–68 (Angi M. Christensen et al. eds., 2d ed. 2019), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815734-3.00014-2.
• 75.   Nicole Martinez-Martin & David Magnus, Privacy and Ethical Challenges in NextGeneration Sequencing, Expert Review of Precision Medicine and Drug Development,
• 76.   Sunil K. Verma & Gajendra K. Goswami, DNA Evidence: Current Perspective and Future Challenges in India, Forensic Science International, 241:183–189 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.05.016.
• 77.   Paul Roberts, LTDNA Evidence on Trial,Frontiers in Genetics, 7:180 (2016), available at https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2016.00180 (accessed Mar. 31, 2025).78. Srivastava, A., Harshey, A., Das, T., et al., Impact of DNA Evidence in Criminal Justice System: Indian Legislative Perspectives, Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 12:51
• 79.   R v. Doheny & Adams, [1997] 1 Cr. App. R. 369 (Eng. Crim. App.), available at https://vlex.co.uk/vid/r-v-doheny-792775641.
• 80.   Ibid.
• 81.   Ibid.
• 82.   Denise A. Filocoma, Unravelling the DNA Controversy: People v. Wesley, a Step in the Right Direction, 3 J.L. &Pol’y 351 (1995), available at https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol3/iss2/8.
• 83.   Ibid.
• 84.   Ibid.
• 85.   Australian Law Reform Commission, Essentially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic Information in Australia (ALRC Report 96), Chapter 44: Criminal Proceedings, available at https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/essentially-yours-the-protection-of-humangenetic-information-in-australia-alrc-report-96/44-criminal-proceedings/reliability-ofdna-evidence/.
• 86.   Ibid.
• 87.   Santosh Kumar Singh v. State Through CBI, (2010) 2 SCC 44, available at https://w w w . c a s e m i n e . c o m / j u d g e m e n t /in/5609aeece4b014971141529e.
• 88.   Ibid.
• 89.   Ibid.
• 90.   Ramprakash Rajagopal, Electronic Records Objection: Though Objection Regarding Absence of Certificate Under Section 65B IEA
• 91.   Ibid.
• 92.   Anokhilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal Nos. 62-63 of 2014, Supreme Court of India, judgment dated December 18, 2019, available at https://api.sci.gov.in/supremeco urt/2013/25955/25955_2013_6_1501_19251_ Judgement_18-Dec-2019.pdf.
• 93.   Ibid.
• 94.   Singh, S.C., DNA Profiling and the Forensic Use of DNA Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 53(2): 195–226 (2011), available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/43953503.
• 95.   Karen Norrgard, Forensics, DNA Fingerprinting, and CODIS, Nature Education, 1(1):35 (2008), available at https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/forensics-dna-fingerprinting-and-codis-736/#:~:text=DNA%20evidence%20is%20 u s e d % 2 0 i n , k i n d s % 2 0 o f % 2 0 c r i m e % 2 0scene%20evidence.
• 96.   Daniele Selby, DNA and Wrongful Conviction: Five Facts You Should Know, Innocence Project (Apr. 25, 2023), available at https://innocenceproject.org/news/dna-andwrongful-conviction-five-facts-you-shouldknow/.
• 97.   National Institute of Justice, The Impact of False or Misleading Forensic Evidence on Wrongful Convictions, National Institute of Justice (Nov. 28, 2023), available at https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/impact-false-or-misleadingforensic-evidence-wrongful-convictions.
• 98.   Ibid.
• 99.   Ibid.
• 100.   Erin E. Murphy, What ‘Strengthening Forensic Science’ Today Means for Tomorrow: DNA Exceptionalism and the 2009 NAS Report, Law, Probability & Risk, 9(1): 7–22 (2010), available at https://academic.oup.com/lpr/article/9/1/7/949818.
• 101.   Srishti, The Impact of Forensic Science on the Legal System in India, Journal of Forensic Science and Research, 9(1): 1–6 (2025), available at https://doi.org/10.29328/journal. jfsr.1001072.
• 102.   President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of FeatureComparison Methods (Sept. 2016), available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_forensic_science_report_final.pdf.
• 103.   H.M. Wallace, A.R. Jackson, J. Gruber & A.D. Thibedeau, Forensic DNA Databases–Ethical and Legal Standards: A Global Review, Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 4(3):57–63 (2014), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejfs.2014.04.002.
• 104.   Aziza Ahmed, Ethical Concerns of DNA Databases Used for Crime Control, Petrie-Flom Center (Jan. 14, 2019), available at https://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2019/01/14/ethical-concerns-of-dna-databases-used-forcrime-control/.
• 105.   Human Rights Watch, Dismantling Detention: International Alternatives to Detaining Immigrants (Nov. 3, 2021), available at https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/11/03/dismantlingdetention/international-alternativesdetaining-immigrants.
• 106.   Jonathan J. Koehler, Jennifer L. Mnookin & Michael J. Saks, The Scientific Reinvention of Forensic Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(41):e2301840120 (2023), available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2301840120.
• 107.   Joe Smith &Mogambal Singh, Forensic DNA Profiling: Legal and Ethical Considerations, Journal of Scientific Research and Reports, 30:141–44 (2024), available at https://doi.org/10.9734/jsrr/2024/v30i51929.
• 108.   S. Panneerchelvam& M.N. Norazmi, Forensic DNA Profiling and Database, Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, 10(2):20–26 (2003), available at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23386793/.
• 109.   John M. Butler, Hari Iyer, Rich Press, Melissa K. Taylor, Peter M. Vallone & Sheila Willis, DNA Mixture Interpretation: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review, NIST Interagency Report (IR) 8351 (Dec. 2024), available at https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2024/NIST.IR.8351.pdf.
• 110.   Salem Khalifa Alketbi, DNA Contamination in Crime Scene Investigations: Common Errors, Best Practices, and Insights from a Survey Study, Biomed Journal of Scientific &
• 111.   Shichun Ling, Jacob Kaplan & Colleen M. Berryessa, The Importance of Forensic Evidence for Decisions on Criminal Guilt, Science & Justice, 61(2):142–149 (2021), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.11.004.
• 112.   President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of FeatureComparison Methods (Sept. 2016), available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_forensic_science_report_final.pdf.
• 113.   National Institute of Justice, The Impact of False or Misleading Forensic Evidence on Wrongful Convictions, National Institute of Justice (Nov. 28, 2023), available at https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/impact-false-or-misleadingforensic-evidence-wrongful-convictions.
• 114.   Ray A. Wickenheiser, Expanding DNA Database Effectiveness, Forensic Science International: Synergy, 4:100226 (2022), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100226.
• 115.   Human Rights Watch, China: Minority Region Collects DNA from Millions (Feb. 18, 2025), https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/12/13/china-minority-region-collects-dna-millions.
• 116.   Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Regional Health Data Networks, Confidentiality and Privacy of Personal Data, in Health Data in the Information Age: Use, Disclosure, and Privacy (M.S. Donaldson & K.N. Lohr eds., National Academies Press 1994), available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236546/#:~:text=Rerelease%20to%20Third%20Parties%20Without,purpose%20or%20a%20compatible%20one.&text=An%20
• 117.   William C. Thompson, The Potential for Error in Forensic DNA Testing (and How That Complicates the Use of DNA Databases for Criminal Identification), in Genetic Explanations: Sense and Nonsense (Sheldon Krimsky & Jeremy Gruber eds., Harvard University Press 2013), available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242076707_The_Potential_for_Error_in_Forensic_DNA_Testing_and_How_That_Complicates_the_Use_of_DNA_Databases_for_Criminal_Identification.
• 118.   Kathane, Prachi, Singh, Anshu, Gaur, J.R., & Krishan, Kewal. The Development, Status and Future of Forensics in India, Forensic Science International: Reports, 3, Article 100215 (2021), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j. fsir.2021.100215.
• 119.   Jonathan J. Koehler, Jennifer L. Mnookin, & Michael J. Saks, The Scientific Reinvention of Forensic Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(41): e2301840120 (2023), available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2301840120.
• 120.   Rakesh Kumar Singh, Justice through DNA Technology, UJALA: Judicial and Legal Review, Vol. 4, Article 4 (2025), available at https://ujala.uk.gov.in/files/Vol%204/Article_4.pdf.
• 121.   Dr. Himanshu Pandey & Ms. Anhita Tiwari, Evidential Value of DNA: A Judicial Approach, Bharati Law Review, Jan.–Mar. 2017, at 13–35, available at https://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/upload/bf936e7d-4211-4ae4-9bd7-3d721a8e424c.pdf122. Aaratrika Bhaumik, Supreme Court Monthly Digest: October 2021 [Citation: LL 2021 SC 525 To LL 2021 SC 616], Live Law (Dec. 22, 2021), available at https://www.livelaw.in/topstories/supreme-court-news-october-2021-digest-with-citations-188197.
• 123.   Ibid.
• 124.   Anokhilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2019) 20 SCC 225.
• 125.   Aiman J. Chishti, Punjab & Haryana High Court Flags ‘Lackadaisical Approach’ of Police in Collecting DNA, Seeks Affidavit of DGP on Compliance of Guidelines, Live Law
• 126.   Veerendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 39/2015, Supreme Court of India, judgment dated July 14, 2016, available at https://theamikusqriae.com/

Data Sharing Statement

Funding