Supreme Court acquits man on death row, issues nationwide guidelines on DNA evidence handling

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday set free a man on death row in a case of murder of a young couple in Tamil Nadu's Theni in 2011 after finding faulty investigation, and issued guidelines as common procedure to be followed on DNA evidence.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta granted "clean acquittal" to Kattavellai alias Devakar by allowing his appeal against the Madras High Court's judgment which upheld his conviction and sentence of capital punishment for killing Ezhil Muthalvan and murder and rape of second victim at Suruli Falls, a popular meeting point for friends and lovers, on May 14, 2011 for purpose of looting jewellery and money.

Having examined the evidence, the court noted chain of circumstances could not be proved and requisite care regarding the sensitive evidence (DNA etc) was not taken in the slightest.

"Surprisingly and shockingly, the postmortem of the deceased persons was conducted at the spot of the crime without due regard to the possibility of contamination, effect of such examination being conducted in the open, etc. None of the courts below have found this to be objectionable," the bench said.

The court noted that DNA evidence was rendered unusable in the case, for the reason that proper methods and procedures were not followed in the collection, sealing, storage, and employment of it in the course of the conviction.

"The worrying feature here is that the conviction had no legs to stand on whatsoever and yet the appellant-convict has been in custody for years," the bench said.

The court pointed out, in foreign jurisdictions such as the United States of America, acquittal after a long period of incarceration has led courts to direct States to award compensation to the persons who suffered behind bars, only to be eventually held innocent.

"Well, it is for the legislature to consider this aspect," the bench said.

In its guidelines, the court said, the document recording the collection, besides FIR number, name of police station, should have the signatures and designations of the medical professional present, the investigating officer and independent witnesses.

The absence of independent witnesses should not be said to have compromised the collection of such evidence, the court clarified, adding the efforts to bring such witnesses and the inability to bring them should be recorded.

The court further said the investigating officer would be responsible for the transportation of the DNA evidence to the police station or hospital concerned and ensure samples reached the designated forensic science laboratory within 48-hour from collection.

"Should any extraneous circumstance present itself and the 48-hours timeline cannot be complied with, the reason for the delay shall be duly recorded in the case diary," it said.

Throughout the process requisite efforts were ordered to be made to preserve samples according to the requirements.

"While the DNA samples are stored pending trial and appeal, etc, no package shall be opened, altered or resealed without express authorisation of trial court acting upon a statement of a duly qualified medical professional to the effect that the same shall not have a negative impact on the sanctity of evidence," the court said.

The court also said the concerned had to be assured that the step was necessary for a proper and just outcome of the investigation or trial.

"Right from the point of collection to the logical end, i e, conviction or acquittal of the accused, a chain of custody register shall be maintained wherein each and every movement of the evidence shall be recorded with counter sign at each end thereof stating also the reason," the bench said.

The "chain of custody" register should necessarily be a part of the trial court record and investigating officer concerned will be answerable in case of any lapse.

The bench said DGPs of all states should prepare sample forms of the register and every other documentation directed by the court and ensure its dispatch to all districts with necessary instruction if required.