DNA Evidence and Human Rights: A Comparative Study of Indian and Australian Jurisprudence

The admissibility of DNA evidence plays a crucial role in criminal justice systems, influencing case outcomes while raising significant human rights concerns. This paper provides a comparative analysis of the legal frameworks governing the admissibility of DNA evidence in India and Australia, focusing on relevant legislation, judicial interpretations, and human rights challenges. In Australia, DNA evidence is regulated under the Uniform Evidence Act 1995, Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), and various state-based Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000, ensuring strict procedural safeguards, reliability, and adherence to privacy standards. In contrast, India lacks a comprehensive legal framework, relying on provisions from the The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the proposed DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019, which remains pending legislative approval. The absence of standardised procedures in India raises concerns about the misuse of DNA data, improper collection methods, and violations of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This study critically examines the key challenges in both jurisdictions, including the ethical implications of DNA databases, risks of wrongful convictions, consent requirements, and data retention policies. By analysing landmark judicial decisions and statutory provisions, the paper identifies best practices that India can adopt from Australia to enhance the admissibility and ethical use of DNA evidence. The research concludes with recommendations for policy reforms aimed at ensuring a balance between forensic advancements and the protection of human rights in both legal systems.