Admissibility Of Illegally Obtained Evidence: A Comparative Analysis Of The Exclusionary Rule In India And The United States Of America
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 days ago
- 1 min read
Yuvaraj D, LLM, The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University
ABSTRACT
The admissibility of illegally obtained evidence remains a critical issue in criminal justice systems, as it directly affects the balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of fundamental human rights. This research undertakes a comparative analysis of the exclusionary rule as applied in India and the United States of America. While the United States has developed a constitutionally entrenched exclusionary rule to deter unlawful State action and protect civil liberties, Indian courts have traditionally admitted illegally obtained evidence on the basis of relevance, subject to limited constitutional safeguards.
The study examines the constitutional foundations, judicial approaches, and landmark case laws shaping the exclusionary doctrine in both jurisdictions. In the United States, the exclusionary rule, rooted in the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, functions as a vital mechanism to enforce due process and police accountability. In contrast, the Indian legal framework, governed primarily by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, reflects a pragmatic approach that prioritizes truth-finding, often at the cost of procedural fairness.
Through a non-doctrinal and analytical methodology, this research evaluates the impact of these differing approaches on the rights of accused persons, judicial integrity, and the overall fairness of trials. It further explores whether India should adopt a partial exclusionary rule that excludes evidence obtained through serious violations of fundamental rights. The study concludes that a calibrated exclusionary framework in India would strengthen constitutional governance, enhance human rights protection, and uphold the rule of law without compromising the administration of criminal justice.
Keywords: Illegally Obtained Evidence, Exclusionary Rule, Fair Trial, Fundamental Rights, Comparative Constitutional Law
