Forensic Evidence And Criminal Justice In India: Assessing Reliability, Admissibility And Evidentiary Value Under The Contemporary Indian Legal Framework
Vikrant Diwakar, Delhi High Court
ABSTRACT
Forensic evidence has become an important part of criminal investigations and court cases in India. DNA analysis, fingerprints, forensic toxicology, ballistics, checking documents and digital evidence can help courts understand what happened and connect people, things and places. However forensic evidence is not the same as being completely correct. Mistakes can happen because of things like getting samples mixed up not taking samples people making biased choices using bad methods not writing down details properly not checking if methods work not keeping track of evidence properly lab mistakes and saying more than is true. So, the legal question is not just if forensic science is helpful. If a specific forensic result is important allowed in court scientifically correct and strong enough for the situation in the case.
This paper looks at the legal rules about forensic evidence focusing on the change from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). It looks at what experts say under Section 39 BSA facts that affect the opinions of experts, electronic and digital evidence under Sections 61–63 BSA, the requirement for forensic investigation under Section 176(3) BNSS and reports from government scientists under Section 329 BNSS. The paper also looks at how Indian courts deal with evidence DNA, fingerprint evidence, digital evidence, scientific techniques and the chain of custody.
The study says that Indian law has made protections through laws and court decisions but still doesn't have one full rule for checking if evidence is reliable like the Frye or Daubert rules in the United States. So, the right way for India should mix rules about being relevant and allowed in court with judges checking if the expert is good if the method is correct if it has been tested, if there are errors if quality is good if the chain of custody is correct and if the conclusion is limited. The paper suggests changes like making sure labs are approved checking if people are good, at their jobs having checks sharing information letting the defense see forensic evidence managing crime scenes training experts and making reports clear.
Keywords: Forensic Evidence; Expert Opinion; Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023; BNSS, 2023; DNA Evidence; Digital Evidence; Chain of Custody; Reliability; Admissibility; Criminal Justice.
