the prosecution has failed to prove the factum of safely transmission of sealed jar of fetal tissue to the office of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore. In this way, I have no hesitation to hold that when the safe transmission of sample parcels to the office of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency is not proved then the positive report of DNA cannot be relied upon.
I have also observed that DNA is considered a type of expert evidence in criminal proceedings; therefore, it cannot be accepted as primary evidence and may only be used for corroboration. In any event, it is an expert opinion, and even if it was accepted as evidence and relied upon, it would not be adequate to link the appellant’s neck to the commission of the crime when I have found all the other evidence to be implausible. As a result, it cannot be relied upon to impose conviction on a capital charge. In this way, this piece of evidence is also not helpful to the prosecution case.
The prosecution case is hinges upon the circumstantial evidence and DNA report. It is well settled by now that in such like cases, prosecution is required to link each circumstance to the other in a manner that it must form a complete, continuous and unbroken chain of circumstances, firmly connecting the accused with the alleged offence and if any link is missing then obviously benefit is to be given to the accused.