SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

Internal Assessment I – Forensic Science

RESEARCH ARTICLE

ROLE OF FORENSIC DENTISTRY IN INVESTIGATION OF RAPE CASES

NAME: Aarya Karande

DIVISION: D

PRN: 20010125516

COURSE: BA LL.B. (H)

BATCH: 2020-2025

WORD COUNT: 3174 words

1|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

RESEARCH QUESTIONS.....................................................................................................3
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................3
ANALYTICAL STUDY..........................................................................................................4
Bite marks..................................................................................................................................4
Method of investigation.............................................................................................................5
Reliability of forensic odontology ............................................................................................5
Nirbhaya rape case and foresic odontology .............................................................................7
CRITICAL ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................8
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS...............................................................................10
BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………. 12

2|Page
 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

i. What is the evidentiary value of an evidence based on bite mark analysis in the
investigation of rape cases ?
ii. What issues are prevalent in the process of investigating bite marks and why it is not
appropriate to completely rely on odonatological evidence ?
iii. What changes can be implemented to resolve the issues and regard odonatological
evidence as conclusive proof in rape cases ?

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1. The paper seeks to fully understand the intricacies of using odonatological evidence
with specific reference to the technologies employed in undertaking bite mark
analysis.

2. Analysing the position of DNA Profiling in the Indian legislative and judicial
structure, while tracing the guidance of the judiciary using principles of interpretation
and evaluation.

3. Examining the relevance of odonatological evidence in the investigation of rape cases.

4. Identifying the issues prevalent in examining bite marks and providing solutions to
resolve the same.

INTRODUCTION

Forensic odontology involves the handling, examination, and evaluation of dental evidence in
a criminal justice system. The characteristics of teeth, their alignment, and the structure of the
mouth as a whole provide information for identifying an individual. Bite mark analysis is an
integral part of forensic dentistry which is used in investigation of rape cases.

The admission of bite mark as a substantial piece of evidence is based on the premise that
every individual’s dentition is unique and a dentist is capable of comparing a record of the
3|Page
assailant's dentition with a record of a bite mark left on a victim.  Forensic dentists,
prosecutors, and judges generally view bite mark evidence positively, as a valid method for
definitively identifying an offender.1

A bite mark is understood under the purview of forensic science as "a pattern produced by
human or animal dentitions and associated structures in any substance that can be marked
by these means."2  The examination of the bite mark plays an important role in identifying an
individual by comparing a record of the accused’s dentition with a record of a bite mark
present on the victim’s body. It also plays a vital role is assessing the age and sex of the
individual whose bite mark is present on the victim’s body. Several factors contribute to the
uncertainty of the evidentiary value of bite mark evidence however it still continues to be a
substantial piece of evidence owing to the unique nature of human teeth.

This article explains the significance of forensic odontology and bite mark analysis in the
light of rape cases. This research article intends to explain the process involved in
investigation of bite marks. It examines the evidentiary and constitutional issues involved in
examination of bite marks and provides suggestions for resolving the issues and improving
the procedure for introducing such evidence in court.

ANALYTICAL STUDY

BITE MARKS

A "bite mark" is a "substance alteration caused by teeth or surrounding tissues". There are
seven types of "altercations" that provide different information to the forensic dentist:
petechial hemorrhages, abrasions, contusionsq, lacerations, incisions, avulsions, and artifacts.
In case of rape victims bite marks are found on the breasts, thighs, pubis, neck, arms and
posterior of the victim’s body.

1
E.g., I. GLADFELTER, DENTAL EVIDENCE: A HANDBOOK FOR POLICE (1975); Levine, Forensic
Odontology Today - A "New" Forensic Science, 41 FBI L. ENFORCEMENT BULL. 16 (1980).
2
Clark MA, Sandusky GE, Hawley DA, Pless JE, Fardal PM, et al. (1991) Fatal and near-fatal animal bite injuries.
J Forensic Sci 36: 1256-1261.

4|Page
 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

The forensic investigation of bite marks involves recognizing and evaluating the bite mark's
characteristics, as well as comparing it to potential suspects.

 The bite mark is photographed, sketched, and measured to create a precise record of
its size, shape, and location on the victim's body. The methods used to record bite
mark evidence are highly technical. They vary according to the preferences of the
forensic practitioner and must be employed with the utmost precision. Photography is
a technique shared by all individuals. Most also make casts and impressions of the
suspect's teeth, as well as the bite mark if possible. Some utilize more sophisticated
techniques, including scanning electron microscopy and computer-enhanced
photography.
 The bite mark is then examined for the orientation and spacing of the teeth, as well as
any distinctive characteristics such as chips, gaps, or irregularities. This can assist in
identifying potential suspects based on dental records.
 To collect biological material such as saliva, blood, or skin cells, swabs or scrapings
may be taken from the bite mark. DNA analysis can then be used to identify the
person who left the bite mark.
 The bite mark is compared to dental impressions of potential suspects, which can be
obtained via voluntary dental exams or court-ordered dental impressions. The bite
mark and the impressions can be compared with software or by visual inspection.
 Forensic odontologists, who are trained in the analysis of dental evidence, may offer
expert testimony in court regarding the likelihood that a suspect's teeth match the bite
mark.

RELIABILITY OF FORENSIC ODONTOLOGY

A bite mark is the impression or mark left by the teeth or other oral structures. Analysis of
bite marks is a practice of forensic odontology in which a dentist or odontologist attempts to
identify the source of a bite mark by examining and comparing the dental impressions found
at a crime scene. This analysis involves evaluating the suspect's jaw structure, number of
teeth, tooth size, shape, and alignment in order to determine whether a bite mark matches the

5|Page
suspect's oral structure. Among other methods, transparent overlays are used to make this
determination.

The use of bite marks as evidence in criminal investigations has gained popularity in the 20th
and 21st centuries, with bite marks on a victim's body becoming examinable and actionable
when compared to the dental structure of the suspects. Due to the manner in which this
evidence is presented, its use becomes particularly risky. Bite marks are frequently portrayed
as biologically unique, similar to fingerprints or DNA, despite a lack of scientific evidence to
support this assertion.

The victim's physical condition also plays a significant role in the clarity of the bite mark.
The human body is a poor medium for registering bite marks; the elasticity and mobility of
the affected skin, the curved contour or variable shape of the body part bitten, and, in some
instances, shrinkage due to post-mortem dehydration may cause a bite mark to present a
somewhat distorted representation of the attacker's dentition.  The firmness of the underlying
tissue also affects the appearance of the bite mark.

Typically, a bite mark is an ecchymosis or contusion, which is frequently not well-defined. In

such instances, subcutaneous bleeding may follow tissue planes along the path of least
resistance and may not correspond precisely to the site of dental impact. Susceptibility to
injury from bites is affected by the victim's gender, age, and the presence of certain diseases
or physical disorders.

Three external factors significantly contribute to the distortion of the bite mark.

 The attacker's force, which is frequently a function of his or her mental state, will
have a profound effect on the nature of the wound. If the bite mark only results in
contusions and no incisions, lacerations, or avulsions, the forensic dentist may be
unable to make a comparison.
 The extent and nature of the victim's defence or resistance may cause additional
distortion if the victim's skin moves and pulls during the attacker's bite.
 The physical orientation of the attacker in comparison to the victim at the time of the
bite affects the clarity of the bite mark, depending on the force used, torque applied
during the bite, location of the bite, and attack angle.

The interval between the discovery of a bite mark and its examination by a forensic dentist is
crucial for the preservation of evidence. Surface indentations and minor contusions fade

6|Page
relatively quickly, whereas significant contusions typically remain useful for evidence for
four to twelve hours. Thus, depending on the severity of the bite, the victim's condition, and a
multitude of other variables, a delay of a few hours may result in the loss of clearly defined
impressions of the attacker's teeth on the victim's skin. Thus we can confer that time plays a
significant role in the process of examining bite marks and delay of any sort can affect the
validity of the bite mark evidence.

As an outcome of the aforesaid issues, authorities around the world have begun to view bite
mark evidence as unreliable, with bite marks being the cause of the recent exoneration of
innocent individuals in the United States.

NIRBHAYA RAPE CASE AND FORENSIC ODONTOLOGY

The Delhi Police requested the assistance of the forensic odontology department in Dharwad
on 1 January 2013 to investigate bite marks found on the victim in the 'Nirbhaya' case. The
following day, a sub-inspector from the Vasant Vihar Police Station in New Delhi flew to the
SDM College of Dental & Hospital in Dharwad and delivered photographs of the bite marks
found on the victim as well as dental models of the five adult male suspects in the case.
Typically, bite marks are discovered in cases of sexual assault. These bite marks can
resemble the teeth that caused them, much like fingerprints.

It was determined that there were five or six bite marks on the victim's body, which were then
thoroughly examined and compared to the teeth of the five suspects. In this investigation, a
computer-based 2D digital analysis was utilized. Following five days of analysis and
investigation, the police received a comprehensive report concluding that teeth of two
suspects matched a few of the bite marks.

On 6 May 2013, the defence attorneys cross-examined the expert witness at the Saket Court
in New Delhi. The Judge accepted this testimony and report, which contributed to the
conviction of two of the accused

7|Page
 CRITICAL ANALYSIS

DNA PROFILING AND ODONTOLOGY

As a field of study, forensic odontology falls under the broader concept of DNA profiling, in
which an individual's identity is determined on a molecular level using tooth samples 3. In
contrast to odontology, which refers to the collection of DNA from teeth, DNA profiling, also
known as DNA fingerprinting, refers to the collection of an individual's DNA from any part
or cell of their body.4

Forensic odontology refers to the process of understanding the structural aspect of a DNA
based solely on the molecular signature present in the human tooth. 5 Human teeth are
renowned for being the strongest part of the body. The dense layer of hard tissue, which has
the ability to resist change due to external factors such as heat or pressure, encases a pulp that
contains an abundance of the individual's DNA. The study of human DNA through
odontology has gained popularity in recent years due to the ability of teeth to remain intact
despite the body's exposure to extreme conditions. Regardless of whether the body has been
burned or bombed, the intrinsic nature of a tooth allows it to remain intact while protecting
the pulp, making it an excellent source for DNA profiling.6

Evidentiary value in India

Initially, the Indian judicial system treats forensic science or its evidence as oral evidence,
which is therefore only persuasive. While the Constitution seeks to incorporate a "scientific
temper" and strives in that direction, Sections 51A(h) and (j) of the Indian legislative
framework do not contain explicit laws that regulate forensic evidence. Nonetheless, the
existing legal framework permits courts to consider forensic evidence and, to a lesser extent,
forensic odontology when deciding a dispute. In this regard, Sections 537 and 548 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter CrPC) provide for the medical examination of both the

3
S. Leena Sakari et al, Role of DNA profiling in forensic odontology, Vol. 7 JP BIOALLIED SCI 142, (2015).
4
J. Kenna et al., The recovery and persistence of salivary DNA on human skin, Vol 56 J FORENSIC SCI., 173
(2011).

5
John M. Butler, The Future of forensic DNA analysis, Vol. 370 PHILOS. T R SOC B 7, (2015).
6
Ibid at 9.
7
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 53, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973
8
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 54, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973

8|Page
accused and the arrested. In addition, the 2005 amendment to Section 54-A9 mandates that a
rape victim undergo a medical examination. While the statute only specifies the examination,
the DNA profiling performed using the suspect's tooth, blood, etc., falls within the scope of
the provision and is therefore admissible in court. In addition to the Criminal Procedure
Code, Section 4510 of the Indian Evidence Act allows the court to consider the opinion of a
medical expert or, more importantly, a forensic scientist

In spite of the fact that forensic evidence is accommodated by the existing provisions, case
law demonstrates that, while courts rely heavily on forensic evidence, it has rarely been used
as conclusive evidence when deciding a case. In Madan Gopal Kakad v. Naval Dubey11, the
court ruled that the opinion of the court formulated using the forensic evidence presented
constitutes the court's opinion and is therefore binding. In addition, the court referred to DNA
profiling as a "perfect science" after noting the accuracy of the evidence provided by
forensics12. DNA evidence is not regarded as conclusive by the judiciary, despite the
reliability of forensic science and the fact that it is referred to as a "conclusive piece of
evidence."13 In Goutam v. State of West Bengal,14 the court was hesitant to use DNA
profiling in paternity tests and maintenance proceedings.

Despite a reluctance towards DNA profiling, the Courts have frequently devised tests to
shape the law in a way that promotes the national standard under Articles 51A(h) and 51B(j).
In Thokozani Damayanti v. State of Orissa15, the court established a series of tests that take
into account the offender's characteristics and the seriousness of the crime in order to strike a
balance between the use of DNA profiling and the public interest. The admissibility of DNA
profiling was altered by the Rhoit Shekar16 case, in which the court examined DNA profiling
in paternity tests at an international level and stated, among other things, that the child has the
right to know their parents under international instruments such as the United Nations
Declaration of Human Rights.

Given that forensic odontology falls under the broader category of DNA profiling, it is
pertinent to note at this juncture that the courts have relied on the opinion of the forensic

9
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 54-A, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973
10
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, §45, No. 1, Acts of Parliament, 1872
11
Madan Gopal Kakad v. Naval Dubey, (1993) 3 SCC 204
12
Patangi Balaram Venkata Ganesh v. State of A.P., (2003) Cri LK 4508
13
Raghuvir Desai v. State, (2007) Cri LJ 829
14
Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal, (1993) 3 SCC 418
15
Thogorani Damajanti v. State of Orissa, 59 (2004) Cri LJ 400
16
Rohit Shekar v. Shri Narayan Dutt Tiwari, (2011) 121 DRJ 562 (Delhi).

9|Page
scientist without questioning the method, instead focusing on how the samples were
collected17. Even though the court does not rely solely on the opinion, it frequently plays a
significant role in determining the outcome of the dispute.18

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

According to the paper's findings, Forensic Odontology is a branch of DNA Profiling in

which the deoxyribonucleic acid or rather its arrangement is discerned through the macular
signature found within the pulp of the tooth, which is protected from external conditions such
as heat or pressure by a thick layer of tissue. This inherent quality of the tooth makes it an
excellent source for DNA extraction. The hard structure of a tooth and its ability to remain
intact despite high temperatures or, in some cases, bombing, make the DNA contained therein
reliable.

While forensic odontology presents itself as a reliable source of evidence, bitemark analysis
that falls under its purview cannot be considered conclusive, especially given the number of
wrongful convictions it has led to. The authors of this paper argue that bite mark analysis
must be performed in conjunction with the Mitochondria DNA test, which would provide
conclusive and comprehensive evidence regardless.

Lastly, while the Indian Legislative framework does not contain any exclusive legislation for
the regulation of DNA profiling, the existing framework has been interpreted in a way that
accommodates the admissibility of DNA profiling in both criminal and civil cases without
rendering it unconstitutional. The routes of interpretation establish unequivocally the "ideal"
nature of DNA profiling.

Therefore, based on the prior observations, the authors propose the following
recommendations:

 Legislation creation: The Indian legislature, despite attempting to pass the "DNA
technology regulation" bill in 2019, has failed to create a framework of rules that
regulates the procedures employed in the collection of DNA. This constitutes a
violation of article 21, as the right enumerated therein may only be restricted or
17
Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Convener Secretary, Orissa State Commission for Women, AIR 2010 SC 2851; Geeta
Saha v. NCT Delhi, (1999) 1 JCC 101
18
K.S. Narayan Reddy, The Essentials of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, pg 387, (2004).

10 | P a g e
 curtailed in accordance with a legal procedure. The absence of a procedure will hinder
the expansion of DNA fingerprinting in criminal investigations. A law governing
DNA profiling and its admissibility in the court system is therefore urgently required.
 Allowing Protection Against Self-Incrimination : While, on the one hand, a series of
cases, from Nandlal Wasudeo Badwik to Ritesh Kumar19, have ruled on the
constitutionality of DNA profiling under article 20(3), another series of cases, such as
Selvi v. State of Karnataka20, have found medical tests such as "brain mapping" to
violate the constitutional right because the individual provides evidence against
themselves while under the influence of a drug. The provision of DNA is similar in
nature, as the individual essentially provides evidence that could implicate them in a
crime – in other words, self-incrimination. To avoid further conflict, the
constitutionality of the practice under article 20(3) and 21 must be evaluated in light
of the existing case law.
 Need for a Holistic Analysis: Since neither of the two primary types of
odonatological evidence, bite marks and mtDNA, provides a fool proof and
dependable method for the identification of a suspect/victim, the authors recommend
taking a holistic view of these techniques. The use of either technique individually
remains impractical and unreliable; however, the techniques may be able to provide
better and more reliable evidence when combined. For instance, if there is an mtDNA
match, conducting a bite mark analysis with the jaw structure would assist in
identifying the perpetrator more precisely, especially in the case of family disputes in
which multiple suspects share mtDNA.
 Research and Development: The nascent field of forensic odontology plays a crucial
role in the identification of individuals, particularly in situations involving mass
destruction, in which the majority of human bodies lose their shape/form, making
them more difficult to identify. Forensic odontology necessitates technological
advancement and resources for nations to maximize the subject's potential.

19
2014 Latest Caselaw 7 SC
20
(2010) 7 SCC 263

11 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRPAHY

1. SL Sakari et al., Role of DNA Profiling in Forensic Odontology

2. Dr. N. Arvinda Babu, et. al., DNA Profiling. - Saviour in Forensic Odontology,
3. Gazi Sultana et al., Mitochondrial DNA and Methods for Forensic Identification,
4. Kewal Kishan et al., Dental Evidence in Forensic Identification – An overview,
methodology and present status.
5. V. Gomes et al., Alleged biological father incest: a forensic approach.
6. S. Paneerchelvam, Forensic DNA Profiling and Database.
7. J.M. Butler, Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markets.
8. Lalji Singh, DNA Profiling and its applications.
9. I.A. Pretty, A look at forensic dentistry – Part 2: Teeth as weapons of violence –
Identification of bitemark perpetrators.
10. Gurveen Gill and Ranjit Singh, Reality Bites – Demystifying Crime.
11. I. A. Pretty, Forensic dentistry: 2. Bitemarks and bite injuries.
12. Bite Mark Evidence Deemed Unreliable, Innocence Project (2013).
13. A.H. McNamee, Adherence of forensic odontologists to the ABFO guidelines for victim
evidence collection.
14. Prajapati, Ghevaram et al., Role of forensic odontology in the identification of victims of
major mass disasters across the world: A systematic review.
15. Duane E. Spencer, Forensic odontology: an overview.

12 | P a g e