In civil dispute resolution and criminal adjudication, human identification poses a daunting challenge for the investigator as well as the judge. In civil matters, human identification is obligatory for determining the parentage of a child, which may be required for dealing with a plethora of litigations related to parentage, inheritance, lineage, maintenance, divorce, etc. Disaster victim identification (DVI) with precision is equally challenging. Human identification, in criminal cases, is crucial for linking an accused or a suspect with a crime beyond all reasonable doubt. In many cases, recognition of the victim by normal morphological or biometric identification gets complicated especially if the body is either defaced, beheaded, putrefied, or when only the skeletal bodily remains are available for identification. DNA in, last three decades, has emerged as a potent evidentiary tool for human identification encompassing manifold usages. Any laboratory result offered by emerging forensic technology needs legal scrutiny before gaining acceptance as admissible evidence during court proceedings. In the courtroom, DNA inputs as evidence have undergone strict legal scrutiny; and various associated intertwined precepts have emerged after conquering the courtroom contest. This chapter begins with a need for corroboration followed by explaining various legal facets for admissibility of DNA in the legal proceedings establishing it as an independent truth machine free from any encumbrance. Jurisprudential concepts such as corroboration, admissibility standards, the doctrine of consent and self-incrimination, DNA databank, and legal regime on DNA evidence have been pondered to explain legal nuances of DNA as evidence in the court proceedings.