Scientific Investigation, Personal Liberty, And Constitutional Restraint In India: Toward A Liberty-Centric Forensic Framework
- IJLLR Journal
- 18 hours ago
- 2 min read
Mayankraj Vijay Kumar Sharma
ABSTRACT
Growing use of current forensic techniques (such as Narco Analysis, Polygraphs, Brain Electrical Activity Profiling, Mandatory DNA Extracting, Biometric Surveillance and Seizure of Digital Evidence) has changed fundamentally the balance between individual civil liberties and investigation authorities in India. This paper will show that scientific value will not provide legal constitutional authority alone. Using a doctrinal approach to analysing Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and considering the reasoning used by the Supreme Court in Selvi v State of Karnataka (2010) and KS Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017), will show that the bodily integrity, mental privacy, cognitive liberty and decision- making autonomy of the accused are absolute limitations placed on the investigative powers of the State through the Constitution. The rights of the accused do not end with being viewed as an object containing evidence: the accused are full rights-bearing persons with their own dignity having rights regardless of the seriousness of the offence being prosecuted. Additionally, this paper will conclude that the use of custodial consent is frequently an illusion in reality, due to the coercive nature of police custody in India, and that the application of scientific methods to people without conscious consent incurs the same issues of the Constitution as does the use of physical coertion and, whether through the use of pharmacology, psychology or neuroscience, will have similar implications regarding the Constitution. Drawing on the proportionality framework established in Puttaswamy and on comparative human rights standards, the paper proposes a liberty-centric framework for forensic investigation. This framework requires: mandatory prior judicial authorisation for all invasive procedures; genuine, magistrate- recorded consent with independent legal representation; audio-visual recording of all forensic processes; comprehensive statutory regulation of DNA and biometric databases, including strict purpose limitation and retention limits; and enforceable remedies for constitutional violations. The paper concludes that the legitimacy of criminal investigation in a constitutional democracy depends not only upon securing convictions, but upon preserving the humanity of those subjected to investigation. Scientific progress can strengthen justice only when it remains disciplined by constitutional morality.
Keywords: Bodily integrity, Mental privacy, Cognitive liberty, Custodial consent, Judicial authorization.
