Criminal Death Sentence reversed Appeal Allowed. Conviction Set aside

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.1636-1637 OF 2023 

(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) Nos.11009-11010/2015)

19th May, 2023

 Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad … Appellant 

Versus 

State of Maharashtra … Respondent

The following issues arise for consideration in the present appeals :

 1) Whether non-recording of a disclosure statement of the appellant in the language in which it is made and recording of the same in a language totally unknown to the appellant, contents 2 whereof are also not read over and explained to him, can be said to have caused any prejudice to the cause of justice?

 2) Whether DNA evidence can form the solitary basis in determining the guilt of the appellant? 

3) Whether the circumstances as identified and relied on by the prosecution indeed point to the guilt only of the appellant, closing out any and all other possibilities of any other person?

n\ Pattu Rajan v. State of T.N.8,

 as under;

 “52. Like all other opinion evidence, the probative value accorded to DNA evidence also varies from case to case, depending on the facts and circumstances and the weight accorded to other evidence on record, whether contrary or corroborative. This is all the more important to remember, given that even though the accuracy of DNA evidence may be increasing with the advancement of science and technology with every passing day, thereby making it more and more reliable, we have not yet reached a juncture where it may be said to be infallible. Thus, it cannot be said that the absence of DNA evidence would lead to an adverse inference against a party, especially in the presence of other cogent and reliable evidence on record in favour of such party.”

 Referring to the above case, a three-Judge bench in Manoj v. State of M.P. 9, through S. Ravindra Bhat J., observed;

 “158. This Court, therefore, has relied on DNA reports, in the past, where the guilt of an accused was sought to be established. Notably, the reliance was to corroborate. This Court highlighted the need to ensure quality in the testing and eliminate the possibility of contamination of evidence; it also held that being an opinion, the probative value of such evidence has to vary from case to case.” 66. In the present case, even though, the DNA evidence by way of a report was present, its reliability is not infallible, especially not so in light of the fact that the uncompromised nature of such 

 (2019) 4 SCC 771

(2023) 2 SCC 353 3