DNA test must on victims' bodies: Hyderabad High Court

Hyderabad: In a significant order, the Hyderabad High Court has directed that Directors-General of Police of both Telangana state and Andhra Pradesh to order investigation officers to collect samples of hair, tissues and blood from dead bodies in medico-legal cases and send them for DNA tests to identify the victims.

A division bench of Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar and Justice Shameem Akhter made the order while acquitting a life convict in a case of killing a woman.

The judges said that though there were no witnesses to identify the victim, whose body was found floating in a well in a highly decomposed state, the investigation officer did not collect body samples.

The bench felt that if the samples were collected and sent along with blood samples of the relatives of the deceased for forensic tests, there was possibility that she could have been identified. The bench held that in similar cases, investigating officers were required to identify the body by following the procedure to conduct DNA tests.

The bench said, “DNA fingerprinting can connect the crime scene or a body to another individual. Dry blood stains and sperm can also be used for a DNA test. These tests are useful in various criminal investigations involving offences like rape, murder, kidnapping, exchan-ge of babies, infanticide, abandonment of newborn child, illegal abortion, paternity related disputes, immigration, inheritance, assignation etc.”

The bench said that the DNA test, a new scientific invention which is used for scientific investigation in criminal cases, was useful in cases where witnesses were not available.

The bench said the main advantage of the using DNA was that the test could be done using small samples and could establish their origins with a high degree of certainty.

“DNA is stable and resistant to degradation caused by environmental changes,” the bench said.

Reinstated staff to get back wage
The Hyderabad High Court has held that the decision of the labour court to deny back wages to employees was wholly unjust when their removal of service was declared as illegal by the labour court itself.

Justice P. Naveen Rao, while granting relief to RTC employees Ch Suresh Babu and K. Narsaiah, found fault with the labour court for denying back wages without showing reason, even after declaring that their removal from service by the APSRTC as illegal.

The RTC had rem-oved Mr Suresh from service for being absent without authorisation in 2002. Mr Narsaiah, a driver, was removed from service due to alleged rash driving which resulted in the death of two staff members.

Both moved the labour court challenging their removal by filing separate petitions. The labour court held that their remo-val was illegal and directed the corporation to reinstate them. The court denied them back wages by applying the principle of ‘no work, no pay’. The duo moved the High Court separately, challenging the denial of back wages.

Allowing their cases through a common order, Justice Naveen Rao said the labour court did not discuss why the back wages were denied and why increments were withheld in one case.

The judge noted that when their removal from service was de-clared illegal, and their assertion that they were not gainfully employed in the interim was not controverted, denial of back wages was unjust. 

The judge declared that the petitioners were entitled to back wages from the date of removal from service. He also restored increments to one of the petitioners.