Harmonious Interplay Of Fair Trial And Scientific Investigation: A Constitutional Odyssey
- IJLLR Journal
- Feb 14
- 2 min read
Kashvi Dalal, B.B.A. L.L.B (Hons), National Forensic Sciences University, Delhi Campus
“Criminal Judicial System in this country is at cross-roads, many a times, reliable, trustworthy, credible witnesses to the crime seldom come forward to depose before the court and even the hardened criminals get away from the clutches of law. Even the reliable witnesses for the prosecution turn hostile due to intimidation, fear and host of other reasons. Investigating agency has, therefore, to look for other ways and means to improve the quality of investigation, which can only be through the collection of scientific evidence.”
In 2008, a gruesome and chilling murder of 14 years old Arushi Talwar and the following chaotic investigation shook the nation. What originally started out as a search for justice soon unravelled into a terrifying tale of forensic errors, courtroom drama, and media trials which portrayed the legal system’s vulnerability when scientific investigation fails. Yet, at its core, it raised a more profound and deep constitutional conundrum: how can the right to a fair trial — a sacrosanct — withstand the havoc caused by scientific investigation.
The maxim lex uno ore omnes alloquitur, which means “the law speaks to all with one mouth” is a crucial idea that serves the foundation of all legal proceedings in the world. The primary goal of the criminal trials in accordance with the Indian Judiciary is to ensure that every accused is given a fair trial. In Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat2, the Supreme Court of India observed “each one has an inbuilt right to be dealt with fairly in a criminal trial. Denial of a fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as it is to the victim and to society.” The Indian Judicial System is hence based on the principle of Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat, meaning a person is innocent hence proven guilty.
