DNA test admissibility as evidence: SC ruling may prove a hurdle in conviction in Kasur case

[sparten]

What stupid people make such idiot rules

No. Stupid and uneducated journalists who don't know criminal procedure. Under Ss510 of the CrPC, a chemical examiners report or that or a serologist can be simply read into evidence without the testor having to appear in person. The SC has ruled that this applies ONLY to the chemical examiners and serologists not to other kinds of tests.

For those tests, the person who tested, has to appear in Court and give testimony. The contents of the report are admissible regardless.

 

[MULUBJA]

The evidences which are most authenticated are not considered as evidence. This is a min hurdle in fixing the crime and criminals.

 

[Trango Towers]

Well if police took your dna and planted on some crime that u didnt even comitt.u will understand . WHY

True.....but that's not why it's inadmissible and we both know that

 

[Amaa'n]

How is this possible? Why would a 6/7yr old and other previous girls have an adult’s DNA? I agree other evidence is also required but this is a major breaker

it is not the matter of DNA being present or not present, it is the matter of Law ---- we are using Qanoon i Shahadat 1984, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 & Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 ...

the problem is with the law where it reads that the DNA analysis is an evidence.......
Evidence gathered from Electronic Surveillance, audio recordings, video footage was also not admissible in Pakistani courts due to which many Terrorists were able to walk out of Court rooms, but then came the PPA - Pakistan Protection Act, that covered the flaw in legal system......same amendment will be required if we are to punish the culprit.....if Court hangs this man just on the basis of DNA & confession then it will set the precedent for future cases too where planted evidence can be used for rulings in favor.......we are on a thin ice here and need to walk slowly

 

[Imran Khan]

Pakistani law hahaha lollz

 

[El Sidd]

If Ishaq Dar's confession statement can be shoved up then this is a piece of cake.

By the way this is an overblown conjecture but still points out to major flaws in the system which by the way aint gonna survive long either.

 

[sparten]

it is not the matter of DNA being present or not present, it is the matter of Law ---- we are using Qanoon i Shahadat 1984, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 & Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 ...

the problem is with the law where it reads that the DNA analysis is an evidence.......
Evidence gathered from Electronic Surveillance, audio recordings, video footage was also not admissible in Pakistani courts due to which many Terrorists were able to walk out of Court rooms, but then came the PPA - Pakistan Protection Act, that covered the flaw in legal system......same amendment will be required if we are to punish the culprit.....if Court hangs this man just on the basis of DNA & confession then it will set the precedent for future cases too where planted evidence can be used for rulings in favor.......we are on a thin ice here and need to walk slowly

Thats not correct. Qanun-e-Shahdat 1984 specifically has an Article permitting the Courts to use evidence which has become available due to modern devices or methods. (Artucle 164). Recordings were admissible as the Supreme Court said back imn 1988 (PLD 1988 SC 109). As are videos (2001 YLR 448).

 

[Divergent]

it is not the matter of DNA being present or not present, it is the matter of Law ---- we are using Qanoon i Shahadat 1984, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 & Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 ...

the problem is with the law where it reads that the DNA analysis is an evidence.......
Evidence gathered from Electronic Surveillance, audio recordings, video footage was also not admissible in Pakistani courts due to which many Terrorists were able to walk out of Court rooms, but then came the PPA - Pakistan Protection Act, that covered the flaw in legal system......same amendment will be required if we are to punish the culprit.....if Court hangs this man just on the basis of DNA & confession then it will set the precedent for future cases too where planted evidence can be used for rulings in favor.......we are on a thin ice here and need to walk slowly

Pakistan law has a lot of improvements to be made and so far it’s full of crap.

 

[Amaa'n]

Thats not correct. Qanun-e-Shahdat 1984 specifically has an Article permitting the Courts to use evidence which has become available due to modern devices or methods. (Artucle 164). Recordings were admissible as the Supreme Court said back imn 1988 (PLD 1988 SC 109). As are videos (2001 YLR 448).

That are gathered via Legal means ---- evidence obtained without following the due legal process that has been described in Fair Trail Bill 2013 & PPA 2013 only.......

 

[El Sidd]

That are gathered via Legal means ---- evidence obtained without following the due legal process that has been described in Fair Trail Bill 2013 & PPA 2013 only.......

pehle jurm hota hai ya pehle qanoon banta hai?
apka kia kehna hai?
ya ye bhi pehle murghi ayi ya anda wali debate hai?

 

[Amaa'n]

pehle jurm hota hai ya pehle qanoon banta hai?
apka kia kehna hai?
ya ye bhi pehle murghi ayi ya anda wali debate hai?

sir g, need to amend the law as per the requirement ---- and i want that ---- but pinning a crime merely on the basis of DNA is unfruitful too.....let me give you a counter narrative on this

1) It is being recommended under new Firearms Act that when a new Firearm is purchased by an individual, he is to discharge a bullet & submit those to Forensic Lab for analysis and record keeping......

Tomorrow you get yourself involved in a cooked up case, the men in Power plant the evidence that you submitted - they are able to get you charged, just on the basis of shell casings & metallurgical print of your Firearm......how are you going to defend yourself then in the court of law?

 

[Divergent]

sir g, need to amend the law as per the requirement ---- and i want that ---- but pinning a crime merely on the basis of DNA is unfruitful too.....let me give you a counter narrative on this

1) It is being recommended under new Firearms Act that when a new Firearm is purchased by an individual, he is to discharge a bullet & submit those to Forensic Lab for analysis and record keeping......

Tomorrow you get yourself involved in a cooked up case, the men in Power plant the evidence that you submitted - they are able to get you charged, just on the basis of shell casings & metallurgical print of your Firearm......how are you going to defend yourself then in the court of law?

What about CCTV camera? We have phones these days that unlock using face detection, aren’t Pakistani CCTV cameras strong enough to detect his face and now that they have him, do a face match?

 

[Amaa'n]

What about CCTV camera? We have phones these days that unlock using face detection, aren’t Pakistani CCTV cameras strong enough to detect his face and now that they have him, do a face match?

that is indeed admissible, the cameras where not strong enough to give us a clear picture...team at PITB Lahore had to work on footage to make it clear enough.....all this evidence will have to be submitted in conjuction with the rest of the evidence to get the guy convicted......

 

[El Sidd]

sir g, need to amend the law as per the requirement ---- and i want that ---- but pinning a crime merely on the basis of DNA is unfruitful too.....let me give you a counter narrative on this

1) It is being recommended under new Firearms Act that when a new Firearm is purchased by an individual, he is to discharge a bullet & submit those to Forensic Lab for analysis and record keeping......

Tomorrow you get yourself involved in a cooked up case, the men in Power plant the evidence that you submitted - they are able to get you charged, just on the basis of shell casings & metallurgical print of your Firearm......how are you going to defend yourself then in the court of law?

as i said no law is complete. there are ways to use it for your advantage if you have the right tools. no matter how robust you can make these laws it is human instinct to sneak a way in or around.

the catch here is: SC can ofcourse set a precedence but Parliament is the highest law making body but then again you would say these people will never make a robust law without first ensuring their own loop holes.

kinda messed up

 

[Divergent]

that is indeed admissible, the cameras where not strong enough to give us a clear picture...team at PITB Lahore had to work on footage to make it clear enough.....all this evidence will have to be submitted in conjuction with the rest of the evidence to get the guy convicted......

If these guys go loose, or he gets hanged and the connected dots go free - that’s only half justice