Case Note On Impact Analysis Of Kattavellai @ Devakar Vs. State Of Tamil Nadu
- IJLLR Journal
- 6 days ago
- 2 min read
Updated: 6 days ago
Venus Pateriya, Institute of Law, NIRMA University
Moiz Rafique, Institute of Law, NIRMA University
I. INTRODUCTION
Deoxyribonucleic Acid (hereinafter referred to as “DNA”) evidence has, all over the world and in the country, has become a powerful tool in both civil and crime investigations, particularly paternity or parentage claims. DNA profiling can link biological material such as blood, semen, etc. to a suspect, or establish biological relations in cases where such material is found at the crime scenes. The value that it holds, lies in its scientific reliability when carefully collected, handled, analysed, and preserved.
However, it must be noted that this DNA evidence is not infallible, it is easily prone to contamination, degradation, misinterpretation, quality and quantity issues, procedural defects, etc. Also, collection of DNA evidence raises questions related to dignity, privacy, proportionality, self-incrimination etc.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India issued a landmark judgement in the case of Kattavellai @ Devakar vs. State of Tamil Nadu on July 15, 2025, wherein it significantly stated and concluded the changes in the criminal justice system of India by introducing and establishing detailed regulatory rules for the gathering, storing, and handling of DNA evidence. This landmark judgement addresses mostly all the prevalent structural flaws and loopholes that have long affected the criminal investigations in the country and also have been the reason for erroneous convictions, highlighting a significant advancement in the forensic jurisprudence.
• BEFORE THE JUDGEMENT; THE STATUS QUO AND CHALLENGES
It is well known fact that that the term “Police” and “Public Order” fall under the State List and Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. The state investigating agencies have clearly exercised a huge amount of discretion in crime investigations and relevant procedures, collection of biological samples, handling, transporting, preserving and analysing etc. All of this without any uniform national standard. Prior to the abovementioned judgment, some guidelines and rules for example from the National Human Rights Commission, or forensic standard-setting institutions did exist but they definitely lacked binding force and were inconsistently followed. Many cases had DNA evidence excluded or given little weight due to procedural defects rather than scientific unreliability. This impact analysis seeks to assess how the judgment is likely to reshape the handling, admissibility, perceptions, and legal landscape of DNA evidence in India.
