AI Overview...
Non-Examination of DNA Analyst Under Section 293 CrPC: What’s the Effect?
In criminal trials, especially those involving serious offenses like rape, murder, or sexual assault on minors, DNA evidence often plays a pivotal role. But what happens when the prosecution fails to examine the DNA analyst or scientific expert who prepared the report? Does this procedural lapse doom the case? The answer hinges on Section 293 of the CrPC, which governs the admissibility of reports from certain government scientific experts.
This post delves into the effect of non-examination of DNA analysts under Section 293 CrPC, drawing from landmark judgments. We'll break down the provision, its scope, judicial interpretations, and practical implications for prosecutions and defenses. While DNA reports can be powerful, their weight depends on proper procedure—non-compliance may tip the scales toward the accused.
Understanding Section 293 CrPC: The Basics
Section 293 CrPC allows reports from specified government scientific experts (e.g., chemical analysts, serologists) to be admitted as evidence without formal proof in inquiries, trials, or proceedings. Key subsections:
- Sub-section (1): Such reports are admissible if submitted by a government scientific expert.
- Sub-section (2): The accused can apply to summon the expert for cross-examination, shifting the burden to them.
- Sub-section (4): Lists specific experts (e.g., Chief Government Analyst under Drugs and Cosmetics Act), but courts have expanded this to include DNA experts in practice.
However, DNA fingerprinting experts from centres like the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad, aren't explicitly listed in sub-section (4). This creates debate: Can their reports be tendered without examination? Courts generally say yes, under sub-section (1), unless doubts arise about sample collection, preservation, or analysis. Geetha VS The State Of Kerala - 2005 Supreme(Ker) 204
Pro tip: Mere marking of a DNA report isn't enough—its probative value varies. If unchallenged, it's reliable; if doubted, expert testimony becomes crucial. In Reference VS Virendra Adiwasi - 2025 Supreme(MP) 410
When Non-Examination Doesn't Hurt the Prosecution
In many cases, courts uphold convictions despite non-examination of the DNA analyst, especially if:
- No objections were raised during trial.
- No doubts about sample integrity (collection, sealing, forwarding).
- The report aligns with other evidence (e.g., eyewitnesses, last-seen theory).
Key Judicial Precedents
Nirbhaya Case (Mukesh & Anr. v. State): DNA profiling linked accused to the crime. Reports were accepted without expert examination, as sampling was proper and no tampering alleged. The court emphasized: If the sampling is proper and if there is no evidence as to tampering of samples, the DNA test report is to be accepted. Mukesh VS State for NCT of Delhi - 2017 3 Supreme 385
Reliability in POCSO Cases: In a rape-murder of a minor, the Supreme Court confirmed conviction and death sentence. DNA report was admitted under Section 293 CrPC without expert summoning, as the chain of custody was intact and defense admitted it. False answers under Section 313 CrPC strengthened the case. Vinod alias Rahul Chouhtha VS State of Madhya Pradesh
Expansion to DNA Experts: Even if not listed in Section 293(4), reports from CDFD are admissible under sub-section (1). Courts directed legislative inclusion but allowed use without examination if no foul play. Geetha VS The State Of Kerala - 2005 Supreme(Ker) 203
Here, non-examination has minimal effect—the report carries full evidentiary weight.
When Non-Examination Leads to Acquittal or Retrial
Conversely, failure to examine the analyst can be fatal if:
- Defense raises credible doubts on efficacy (e.g., sample preservation, chain of custody).
- Report is the sole or pivotal evidence.
- Procedural lapses (e.g., no seals, unexplained delays).
Critical Case Examples
Rape and Murder Acquittal: Prosecution relied solely on DNA, but scientific officer wasn't examined. Court held: Examination of Scientific expert is very much necessary to prove documents. Initial burden on prosecution not discharged—benefit of doubt to accused. Paramesha VS State of Karnataka - 2020 Supreme(Kar) 2326
POCSO Rape Case: DNA report marked, but expert not examined. Victim turned hostile; no corroboration. Conviction set aside: Statements under Section 164 CrPC are not substantive evidence; DNA reports require strict adherence to procedural safeguards. VIJAN MANDAL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 1988
Remand for Fair Trial: In a minor's gang-rape and murder, non-examination of DNA experts violated Article 21 (fair trial). Case remanded for de novo trial: Failure to examine scientific experts regarding DNA evidence... leading to a miscarriage of justice. Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati VS State of Madhya Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(SC) 272
Recent Supreme Court View: DNA is opinion evidence under Section 45 Evidence Act. If doubts on drawing/preservation, mandatory to examine expert under Section 293. Absent request and doubts, non-examination okay—but defense must get opportunity. In Reference VS Virendra Adiwasi - 2025 Supreme(MP) 410
In these, non-examination renders the report vulnerable, often leading to acquittal.
Procedural Safeguards and Best Practices
To avoid pitfalls:
- Prosecution: Ensure intact chain of custody (seals, forwarding memos). Tender report under Section 293; alert court if expert needed.
- Defense: Object early; apply under Section 293(2) for summoning if doubts exist.
- Courts: Put incriminating material (including DNA) to accused under Section 313 CrPC. Summon under Section 311 if justice demands. In Reference (Received from Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khandwa, District Khandwa (Madhya Pradesh) VS Anokhilal - 2023 Supreme(MP) 369
Table: Impact Scenarios
| Scenario | Effect of Non-Examination |
|----------|---------------------------|
| No doubts raised; corroborative evidence | Minimal; report admissible Vinod alias Rahul Chouhtha VS State of Madhya Pradesh |
| Sole evidence; chain of custody issues | Fatal; acquittal likely Paramesha VS State of Karnataka - 2020 Supreme(Kar) 2326 |
| Defense requests expert | Mandatory examination In Reference VS Virendra Adiwasi - 2025 Supreme(MP) 410 |
| POCSO/rape-murder; pivotal proof | Retrial if unfair trial Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati VS State of Madhya Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(SC) 272 |
Balancing Privacy and Evidence: Aadhaar & DNA Link
Relatedly, in Aadhaar Judgment, DNA under Section 53A CrPC was upheld if no tampering. But procedural rigor mirrors Section 293—non-compliance risks exclusion. Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd. ) VS Union of India - 2018 7 Supreme 129
Key Takeaways
- Section 293 CrPC facilitates efficiency but isn't a blanket immunity.
- Non-examination is generally harmless if no doubts; otherwise, it's reversible error.
- DNA's probative value demands scrutiny—courts weigh totality of evidence.
- Rarest of rare cases (e.g., child rape-murder) still require procedural purity for death sentences. In Reference VS Kamlesh @ Ghanti - 2013 Supreme(MP) 1564
In sum, while non-examination of DNA analyst under Section 293 CrPC doesn't automatically invalidate evidence, it invites scrutiny. Prosecutions must proactively address vulnerabilities.
Disclaimer: This is general information based on judicial precedents. Legal outcomes vary by facts. Consult a qualified lawyer for advice specific to your case. Not legal advice.
*
Search Results for "Non Examination of DNA Analyst Under Section 293 CrPC: Impact"
2017 3 Supreme 385 • India - Supreme Court
DIPAK MISRA, ASHOK BHUSHAN, R.BANUMATHI
shaken in roving cross examination – Evidentiary value of an injured witness carries great weight – Further, his presence at the ... deposing in regard to recoveries remaining firm in cross-examination – Recovery founded on the statements of disclosure – Items ... of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 154 – Non mentioning of names of assailants, description of the bus and use of iron rods – ... Later on, his #HL_ST....
2017 0 Supreme(SC) 772 • India - Supreme Court
JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J. CHELAMESWAR, S. A. BOBDE, R. K. AGRAWAL, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, A. M. SAPRE, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, S. ABDUL NAZEER
, 2005 and other Acts – Section 5, Indian Telegraph Act of 1885 – Section a href=act ... not examined in M.P. ... Section 8 begins with a non obstante clause, which gives that section an overriding effect, in case of conflict, over the other provisions ... medical examination. ... Section 303 excluded the procedural safeguards under Section 235(2) and 354(3) #HL....
2018 7 Supreme 129 • India - Supreme Court
DIPAK MISRA, A. M. KHANWILKAR, ASHOK BHUSHAN, A. K. SIKRI, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD
process held minimal – Not having disproportionate effect on the right holder. ... , also whether it is manifestly arbitrary – Validity of section 139AA already upheld – Issue on privacy rights not examined – Right ... become inopertaional – Consequences of the non-submission of an Aadhaar number held draconian – Treating every account holder with ... Section 53 of the ....
2021 0 Supreme(SC) 23 • India - Supreme Court
ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, NAVIN SINHA, K. M. JOSEPH
sub-section (6A) of section 21, an application for initiating corporate insolvency resolution process against corporate debtor shall ... be filed jointly by not less than one hundred of such creditors in same class or not less than ten per cent, of total number of ... two months and seek benefit of condonation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act, in regard to period, durin....
2014 0 Supreme(Mad) 707 • India - Madras
S.RAJESWARAN, P.N.PRAKASH
NDPS Act - section 50 - Evidence Act - Arms Act – Section 25(1)(B)(a) – Indian Penal Code - Section 363 ... IPC to 364(A) , 376 , 302 r/w 201 – Criminal Procedure Code - Section 366 – Appeal against conviction – First Information Report ... judge centric test whether society will approve awarding of death sentence to certain types of crime or not - In rarest of rare ... marked directly under Section 293#H....
2025 0 Supreme(SC) 272 • India - Supreme Court
VIKRAM NATH, SANJAY KAROL, SANDEEP MEHTA
trial under Article 21 of the Constitution - The appellants were denied adequate opportunity to challenge DNA evidence due to non-examination ... DNA evidence and the examination of scientific experts. ... (A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(m), 307; Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 - Section 376(DB); Code ... of the DNA#H....
2022 0 Supreme(Cal) 121 • India - Calcutta
SHEKHAR B.SARAF, KESANG DOMA BHUTIA
The court also noted the accused's failure to rebut the presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act. ... impact of the amendment to Section 6 of the POCSO Act. ... Act, and the impact of the amendment to Section 6 of the POCSO Act on the sentencing. ... of Section 293 Cr.P.C. ... ....
2020 0 Supreme(Kar) 2326 • India - Karnataka
B.A.PATIL
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 114, 363, 366, 376, 448, 376 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section ... even Scientific Officer who has given report has also not been examined – As discussed above examination of Scientific expert is ... then case of prosecution has to fail and accused has to be given benefit – Criminal appeal is allowed. ... It is his further submission that as per Section 293#HL_END....
2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 1479 • India - Supreme Court of India
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
of the DNA report under Section 293 CrPC is sufficient compliance of the statutory mandate. ... the reports were not called for evidence, in terms of Section 293 Cr. ... Section 366 CrPC.
• India - High Court of Karnataka
B.A.PATIL
It is his further submission that as per Section 293 of Cr.P.C. any documents or reports ... For the purpose of brevity, I quote Sections 293 and 294 of Cr.P.C which read as under; Under such circumstances non-examination of the Scientific Officer who has given the report
• India - Bombay
Section 293(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure provides for summoning section 293(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to seek statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 2621 • India - High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Under Section 293 of Cr.P.C. any document purporting to be a report under the hand of a Government Scientific expert duly submitted to him for examination or analysis and report in the course of any proceeding may be used as evidence in any enuiry, trial or other proceedings under the code but same time ... Devendra Pathak) for commission of offence under Section 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of IPC and Section 5J/6 and 5L/6 of POCSO Act and under Section 325 of SC/ST (POA) Ac....
2013 0 Supreme(All) 2194 • India - Allahabad
ANIL KUMAR SHARMA
The aforesaid judgments were pronounced on 17.3.2005 and 10.9.2004 respectively, while sub-clause (g) in sub-section (4) of Section 293 Cr.P.C. came in the Code with effect from 23.6.2006 vide Section 26(b) of Act No. 25 of 2005. ... Thus, there was no occasion for the Courts to deal with the object, scope and effect of inclusion of sub-clause (g) in sub-section (4) of Section 293 Cr.P.C. This fac....
2023 0 Supreme(MP) 369 • India - Madhya Pradesh
RAVI MALIMATH, VISHAL MISHRA
During the pendency of these proceedings, the accused has filed an application (IA No.6640 of 2023) under section 367 read with section 391 of the CrPC seeking complete laboratory documents and examination of the expert witness etc. ... (a) The law regarding section 313 of the CrPC is no longer res integra. ... Earlier, summons were issued to him on 11.4.2022 and by relying on section 293 of the CrPC, shifted the burden on the defen....
2005 0 Supreme(Ker) 204 • India - Kerala
K.HEMA
Criminal Procedure .Code . 1973, Section .293(4) -Can D.N.A. ... But, in view of non-inclusion of such government scientific experts issuing reports of DNA Finger Printing in section 293(4) of Cr.P.C. arguments are still unavoidable. This puts the needy to needless trouble and delay. At the time when Section 293 was brought into the Code. ... Hyderabad is not specifically enumerated in sub-section (4) of ....
Filter by Legal Phrase
