Case Commentary On Dharam Deo Yadav V. State Of UP
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
CASE COMMENTARY ON DHARAM DEO YADAV V. STATE
OF UP Amshuman Sankar R, School of Excellence in Law, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai
ABSTRACT
The case of Dharam Deo Yadav v. State of U. P, marks a pivotal development in the integration of forensic science into the Indian criminal justice system. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant, Dharam Deo Yadav, in a murder case primarily based on forensic and circumstantial evidence, including DNA analysis. The judgment underscored the evidentiary value of scientific techniques in criminal trials, reinforcing that such evidence can form the basis for conviction if corroborated by other material facts. The Court emphasized the increasing importance of forensic science in modern criminal jurisprudence, especially in cases lacking direct eyewitness testimony. This case also highlighted the need for proper training of investigating officers and judicial officers in scientific methods to ensure effective justice delivery.
Ultimately, the ruling demonstrated the judiciary's willingness to adapt to technological advancements in the pursuit of justice.
1 INTRODUCTION
The case Dharam Deo Yadav v. State of U. P. 1, was decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by a two-judge bench composed of Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan and Justice A. K. Sikri, pronounced the judgment on April 11th, 2014. , which addressed the pending appeal against the conviction and death sentence awarded by the trial court and upheld by the High Court. This case revolved around the gruesome murder of Ms. Diana, a foreign national who came to India for a tourist visit. The case also stands as a landmark judgment in the domain of forensic jurisprudence, dealing with the nuanced concepts of forensic law such as DNA profiling, and the admissibility of forensic evidence along with the concept of circumstantial evidences which encapsulates a major concept in criminal jurisprudence.
This case plays a pivotal part in underscoring the role of modern forensic techniques in upholding the rule of law and the rights of the victim, despite the lack of or absence of any direct evidence. This work would predominantly underscore the major contribution of this case to the judicial literature on forensic science and its impact on the coming years, curating solely the forensic aspects of the verdict, expressing no prejudice to the contribution this judgment has brought about in the realm of law of evidence in criminal jurisprudence.
2. MATERIAL FACTS2
This case involved the gruesome murder of Diana Clare Routley (hereinafter referred to as ‘Deceased’) a 22-year-old tourist from New Zealand, in Varanasi in 1997. The deceased reached Varanasi on 07.08.1997, staying in a guest house, thereby leaving the guest house on
10.08.1997 at around 7 AM to catch a train to Darjeeling.
Later on, no news about the deceased was heard of, such that the father of the deceased Mr. Routley provided appropriate information on the deceased. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that Mr. Dharam Deo Yadav (the Appellant herein) had contact with the deceased, thus becoming a prime suspect. Mr. Routley came to India to lodge a complaint. With great efforts, certain witnesses were identified, who provided leads to the investigating officers. On 19.08.1998, the accused was caught and interrogated, during which the confession
1 Dharam v. State of U.P., (2014) 5 SCC 509.
2 Id. at para 2.
of commission of murder was reported by the accused, name dropping the associated persons who aided him in his mission. The accused provided the mortal remains which he buried, thereby identifying the skeleton of the accused which was subjected to inquest and post mortem examination by the appropriate authorities. On completion of the investigation. 3 The trial thereby commenced before the Sessions Court, wherein all the accused's were charged under various provisions Indian Penal Code4 relating to murder. 5 The trial court had found the appellant guilty of offences under Section 3026 read with Section 347 of the IPC, while acquitting the appellant under S. 3648 and s. 3949 of IPC, finding this case fit under the rarest of rare doctrine, awarding death sentence.
10 The Appellant had challenged the Trial court's verdict before the Hon’ble High Court, which were dismissed and upheld the death sentence, holding that the case falls under the rarest of rare category. Hence, the appellant the Hon’ble Supreme Court, challenging the order of the High Court. 11
3. ISSUES
a. Whether DNA evidence, being a scientific method, could be relied upon to link the accused to the crime? b. Whether the chain of circumstantial evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction?
4. APPELLANT’S CONTENTION12
1. When a Case solely rests on circumstantial evidence, circumstances taken cumulatively
should form a chain so as to complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that,
3 Id. at para 3.
4 Indian Penal Code (Act 45 of 1860).
5 Supra note 1 at para 4.
6 Supra note 4,S. 302.
7 Supra note 4,S. 34.
8 Supra note 4,S. 364.
9 Supra note 4,S. 394.
10 Supra note 1 at para 6.
11 Supra note 1 at para 7.
12 Supra note 1 at para 8 to 10.
no escape from the conclusion, the crime was committed by the accused and no one else.
2. Oral evidence of several witnesses are totally unreliable to hold that the deceased was
last seen with the accused on 10.08.1997.
3. Witnesses had identified the deceased on the basis of a photograph
4. The mere fact that the accused was seen with the deceased can not lead to the irresistible
conclusion
that appellant had committed the crime.
5. The alleged confession and recovery was made during custody of the accused,
tantamounting to police custody under s.27 of Indian Evidence Act,1872.
6. The search and seizure of police was conducted without following the mandate of
s.100(4) and 100(5) of Criminal Procedure Code.
7. No Independent witness was present during the search and seizure process.
8. The possibility of planting the skeleton in the accused's house cannot be ruled out.
9. Post mortem cannot be accepted as the evidence due to large scale flouting of
procedures has taken place.
10. The credibility of DNA profiling has raised considerable controversy and concerns in
countries from where this was originated.
11. Not a case that comes under the doctrine of rarest of rare, to be awarded a death
sentence. The accused is a rickshaw puller by profession and hence, there is scope for reform and rehabilitation.
5. RESPONDENT’S CONTENTION13
1. Case depends upon the circumstantial evidence, the high court and trial court are justified
in drawing inference from the guilt, all incriminating circumstances are found incompatible
13 Supra note 1 at para 11 to 13.
with the innocence of the accused.
2. Evidence proves that the deceased was last seen with the accused.
3. Eye-witness evidence clearly indicates that the accused drove the deceased to the village,
lived there for a few days, committed murder and later buried the mortal remains.
4. The information divulged by the accused given during custody is in consequence with the
fact discovered and is admissible evidence.
5. Relied upon the statements given by witnesses and the DNA test using the Short Tandem
Repeats method.
6. Skeleton was recovered from the house of the accused was that of the deceased.
6. JUDICIAL
FINDINGS
The Court found that the crime scene has to be scientifically dealt with, without any flaws. In criminal cases which are based on circumstantial evidence, forensic science plays a pivotal role, may corroborate the establishment of crime, identifying the suspect, ascertaining the guilt or innocence of the accused. The Court further underscored the proper precaution required to preserve evidence and also against any attempt to tamper with the material or cause any contamination or damage. 14 The Court underscored the necessity of strengthening the forensic science for crime detection, wherein forensic evidence is free from infirmities such as humiliation, external influence, forgetfulness and other factors.
The Court further held that the judiciary must equip itself to these scientific materials by constant interaction with scientists, engineers aiming at widening the knowledge and effectively deal with cases on scientific evidence15. The Court placed reliance upon a US Supreme Court case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 16 which underscored the essence of science, identifying 4 non-definitive
14 Supra note 1 at para 25.
15 Supra note 1 at para 28.
16 Daubert v. Merrell, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
factors of characteristic scientific knowledge17:
1. testability or falsifiability,
2. peer review,
3. a known or potential error rate and
4. general acceptance within the scientific community.
The court further observed on DNA and skeleton identity that “In cases where skeleton is left, the bones and teeth make a very important source of DNA. Teeth, as often noticed is an excellent source of DNA, as it forms a natural barrier against exogenous DNA contamination and are resistant to environmental assaults”18 The Court held that DNA collection is reliable, such that the prosecution has been successful in establishing the skeleton recovered from the accused is that of the deceased, along with successfully establishing the accused’s guilt in the case.19
7. JUDGEMENT
The court conclusively held that due to the lack of evidence and proof on the manner of commission of crime by the accused, the case does not fall under the rarest of rare doctrine, thus sentencing the appellant to an imprisonment of 20 years of rigorous imprisonment, which is over and above the period already undergone by the accused, without any remission.20 8.ANALYSIS This case has richly contributed to the judicial literature emphasising the importance of evidence collected through scientific methods, particularly in cases where circumstantial evidence exists. The Court was correct in stating that the dependence on evidence collected
17 Supra note 1 at para 30.
18 Supra note 1 at para 33.
19 Supra note 1 at para 34.
20 Supra note 1 at para 36
from samples plays a more pivotal role in comparison to the eye-witnesses who are doubtful of their stance, or their information they have revealed. This judgment has also underscored the essence of scientific processes, during a criminal investigation, emphasising the importance and significance of crime, maintaining the crime scene intact, by avoiding the perils of denaturation, dilution, contamination and other external influences. This case did not conclusively determine the credibility of DNA.
9 CONCLUSION
This case has given the importance of scientific evidence and stood for the protection of victims, especially when the parties involved belong to different nationalities, increasing the sensitivities and scope of biases to and for either sides, which was negated by the corroboration of scientific evidences, thus avoiding international level conflicts or issues, which are prone to erupt in these situations. This verdict is also a guideline value for forensic scientists and law enforcing officers for protecting scientific samples.