Navigating The Constitutional Contours Of Section 176(3) BNSS: The Forensic Mandate
- IJLLR Journal
- Feb 17
- 1 min read
Dr. T. Padma, Assistant Professor, KV Ranga Reddy Law College, Affiliated to Osmania University, Gagan Mahal, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500029
ABSTRACT
The enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, signals a transformative shift in India's criminal justice system, most notably through the introduction of Section 176(3). This provision mandates forensic investigation for offences punishable by seven years or more, transitioning forensic science from a discretionary tool to a procedural obligation. While this ‘forensic mandate’ aims to enhance conviction rates and reduce investigative bias, it invites rigorous constitutional scrutiny.
This paper explores the tension between the state’s interest in ‘scientific justice’ and the accused’s fundamental rights. Central to the discussion is whether the compulsory extraction of biological samples and digital evidence aligns with the Right against Self-Incrimination guaranteed under Article 20(3) and the Right to Privacy interpreted as part of the right to life under Article 21, in the landmark Selvi and Puttaswamy judgments. Furthermore, the study examines the practical challenges posed by this mandate, including the current shortfall in forensic infrastructure and the risk of ‘technological coercion’ in the absence of stringent data protection protocols.
By analysing the intersection of statutory duty and constitutional privilege, this research assesses whether Section 176(3), BNSS, acts as a catalyst for precision justice or a precursor to procedural overreach. It concludes by proposing a harmonisation framework to ensure that the pursuit of scientific proof does not come at the expense of established constitutional safeguards.
Keywords: BNSS, Forensic mandate, Criminal Justice System, Right to Privacy
