The Delhi High Court has permitted DNA testing in a murder trial, even though the case had reached the final stage of arguments.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna emphasized that scientific methods like DNA testing serve as independent tools to uncover the truth and must be utilized to uphold the interests of justice.

“The trial may have concluded and the case may be at the stage of final arguments, but the interest of justice demands that the truth must be discerned to determine the guilt of the accused. Independent evidence that can assist in establishing guilt or innocence should not be excluded on the mere ground of delay—especially in a serious offence under Section 302 IPC,” the court observed.

The order came in response to a petition by the father of a deceased youth, who sought DNA testing of his son's clothes as well as those of the accused. The case, originally filed in 2013, had reached the final argument stage when the plea was submitted.

Earlier forensic reports were inconclusive about the presence of bloodstains. The complainant argued that DNA confirmation of blood on the accused’s clothes could place him at the crime scene, thereby making such testing crucial in a case built on circumstantial evidence.

The prosecution supported the plea, asserting the importance of leveraging advanced forensic tools. In contrast, the accused opposed it, citing undue delay and the fact that prior forensic reports were obtained three years ago.

The trial court had dismissed the application on April 15, 2017, stating that the provisions invoked did not authorize expert examination at this juncture and warning that allowing such a request could be seen as an attempt to introduce fresh evidence. However, it had also clarified that the prosecution was not barred from seeking further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.

Challenging the dismissal, the complainant argued that the trial court failed to acknowledge the value of DNA testing, particularly in a case devoid of direct evidence. The plea stressed that scientific advancements should not be ignored in the pursuit of a fair trial.

The High Court considered the core question: Should DNA testing be permitted at the final stage of trial proceedings?

Reaffirming that the central purpose of a criminal trial is to arrive at the truth, the court concluded that procedural delays should not bar the introduction of independent scientific evidence, especially in a murder trial.

Quoting the Supreme Court’s ruling in Narayan Dutt Tiwari v. Rohit Shekhar, the court noted that the Evidence Act and CrPC, though enacted over a century ago, must adapt to accommodate modern investigative tools. The court referenced statutory amendments under Sections 53, 53A, and 54 Cr.P.C., which formally recognize DNA testing as a legitimate method of evidence collection.

Given that scientific tools were available at the time of the offence, the High Court ruled in favor of DNA testing. It underscored that such results could support either side and are essential for fair adjudication.

Accordingly, the court directed that the clothes of the deceased and the accused be sent for DNA analysis within 15 days.

Case Title: Nand Kishor v. State (2025:DHC:2198)
For the Petitioner: Advocates Mohd. Shamikh and Mohd. Javed
For the Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Digam Singh Dagar