DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA 

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA 

PROJECT TITLE

FORENSIC CASE LAWS RELATING TO SUBSTANTIAL LAWS, PROCEDURAL

LAWS IN INDIA

SUBJECT

FORENSIC LAW

NAME OF THE FACULTY

Dr VARA LAKSHMI

Name of the Candidate

ATTILI. LEELA NAGA JANAKI RAJITHA
Roll No. 
2017018
 VIII Semester

Contents
INTRODUCTION:....................................................................................................................3

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY.................................................................................................4

literature review.........................................................................................................................4

FORENSIC SCIENCE APPLICATION IN INDIAN LAWS:..................................................4

Legal Provisions Supporting Criminal Investigation.................................................................7

Admissibility of Forensic Science in Indian Court Rooms......................................................10

conclusion:...............................................................................................................................12
FORENSIC CASE LAWS RELATING TO
SUBSTANTIAL LAWS, PROCEDURAL LAWS IN
INDIA

INTRODUCTION:
Forensic Science is defined as “The application of science to those criminal and civil laws
that are enforced by the police agencies in a criminal justice system”. Forensic Science deals
“

with the application of the knowledge and methodology of various disciplines of science to
legal matters. For evidence analysis, it involves the use of multiple disciplines such as
medicine, physics, forensic chemistry and biology, DNA profiling, computer science and
engineering. For example, physics is used to recognize the blueprint of a blood scatter;
biology helps to establish the basis of an anonymous suspect and chemistry helps us to find
out the chemical composition of various drugs. Therefore, the function of forensic science in
criminal justice and the legal system is often underestimated and extremely critical in nature. ”

“ In ancient India, the idea of forensic science is not a new one as medical belief was regularly
applicable to the requirements of the law. Sir William Herschel was one of the first to
advocate the use of fingerprinting in the identification of criminal suspects. Fingerprint
evidence was first accepted in an Argentine court in the 1890s and in an English court in
1902. Moreover, Forensic evidence is a discipline that works in accordance with the
parameters of the Indian legal system. Its function is to provide direction to those conducting
criminal investigation and to provide to magistrates/judges the correct information upon
which they can have full trust in determining criminal and civil dispute. This is also helpful in
resolving the criminal and civil cases. ”

“ Further, Forensic science is an incorporation of almost all capabilities of knowledge, a crucial

and proficient resource that makes all dispensation of justice in criminal, civil, regulatory and
social contexts possible. It helps in defining all the applications of science in responding
questions that are of legal significance. In present times, Forensic science is a highly
developed scientific procedure that is used in criminal and civil investigations, it is capable of
answering important questions and forms an integrated part of criminal justice system 1. It

1
Isha Tyagi and Nivedita Grover, Development of Forensic Science and Criminal Prosecution-India, , 2 IJSRP
Vol.4 (2014).
comprises of all renowned techniques such as fingerprint analysis, DNA analysis, ballistics
and explosives, firearms, culture etc. It facilitates to convict those guilty of crime as well as
can pardon the innocent. ”

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the study is to understand the application forensic law in indian laws and the
implementation of forensic evidence in the Courts. The study by taking into consideration the
case laws and different legislations.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The method of review followed is secondary review of information collected secondary
resources. The sources reviewed during research are books, judgments and web sources.

Doctrinal method of research is followed here.

FORENSIC SCIENCE APPLICATION IN INDIAN LAWS:

“ Forensic science is the application of various disciplines of science to legal matters. It is
accountable for providing facts and evidence to the court of law for deciding the culpability
or the other way around of the suspects and offenders. Though it is the only efficient device
for combat, that can be used by the law enforcement agencies, in most real-life scenarios, the
court gives more prominence to non-scientific and non-factual evidence. ”

“ Admissible evidence is that kind of evidence that cannot be objected or dismissed on the
basis of any non-substantial or irrelevant arguments and statements. It could be holding a
potential or a probative value in the court of law. Evidence has to be authentic, complete,
reliable and believable in order to be admissible in the court of law.

In the Indian law context, laws related to Forensic Science are more numbered in the Indian
Evidence Act (IEA), compared to Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Indian Penal Code
(IPC). ”

“ The Indian Evidence Act contains rules, regulations and legislations regarding the
admissibility of scientific evidence in the court of law. This act is classified into 3 parts with
a total of 11 chapters.

1. The first part deals with relevancy of facts. It has 2 chapters.

 2. The second part has chapters 3 to 6 and each has its own peculiarity. Chapter 3
describes about facts that need to be proved before the court of law. Chapter 4 deals
with oral evidence. Chapter 5 gives in details of documentary evidence and Chapter 6
provides you with circumstances where documentary evidence has or should be given
preference over oral evidence.

3. The third part has chapters 7 to 11. Chapter 7 gives importance to burden of proof  and
how important it is to prove evidence and facts. Chapter 8, 9, 10 talks
about estoppels, witnesses and examination of witness respectively. The final Chapter
11 defines improper admission and rejection of evidence.  
”

“ Forensic Science is admissible in Indian law considering the IEA, within 4 aspects: Witness,
Admission, Facts and Circumstantial evidence. Here are superficial details of some widely
known laws that make forensic evidence admissible in the court of law:

Most important and widely known aspect of Forensic Science is DNA and it’s testing. There
is no official legislation passed w.r.t. to DNA testing in the Indian constitution, but Sec
53 and 54 of CrPC deals with examination of alleged person by a certified medical
practitioner on reasonable grounds of inquest.

Sec 293 of CrPC lists some Government Scientific Experts for the admissibility of expert
opinion in the court of law. The expert is examined as a witness for his/her opinion to be
valid after cross contamination. Also Sec 45 of IPC provides relevancy to expert opinion in
any field of expertise in forensic science, to help the court in framing judgements considering
technically complicated and sophisticated matters. ”

“ Forensic Toxicology has been the most active branch of Forensic Science where separate acts
were introduced amending the existing laws and legislations. Sec 272 to 278, Sec 284, Sec
328 of IPC deals with poisoning. Along with general description of poisons, corrosive
substances, adulterants, chemicals and medico-legal aspects, there are acts like:

 The Poison Act (1990)

 Drugs and Cosmetics Act (1940)

 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substance (NDPS) Act (1985)

  The Pharmacy Act (1948)

 The Drug control Act (1950) ” 

“ Another commonly heard term w.r.t. Forensic Science is fingerprints. According to Sec
73 of IEA any person is compelled to give his/her fingerprints on orders from the court. The
Supreme Court has given special mention that this section isn’t a violation of their
fundamental rights. CITATION Leg18 l 16393  (Legal Desire, 2018) Sec
5 and 6 of Identification of Prisoners Act has the same context and allows acquiring thumb
impressions and handwriting samples. It also declares that these shall not be used against the
person as personal testimony. ”

“ Forgery, fraudulence and cheating are quite common in current scenario and are gaining
momentum to be the commonly occurring white-collar crimes. Indian laws have defined
every term related to crimes related to documents.

·         Sec 29 of IPC defines document.

·         Sec 29A of IPC defines electronic records.

·         Sec 463 of IPC and Sec 44 of IEA defines forgery.

·         Sec 420 of IPC defines cheating and Sec 417 defines punishment for the same. ”

“ Sec 47 of IEA is for handwriting opinion and elaborates the circumstances under which the
handwriting expert shall consider it to be a disputed handwriting.

Sec 67 of IEA gives details of methods of how a signature in a document should be proved.

Though it’s been neglected from a quite long time, psychology plays an important part in
legal proceedings and Forensic Psychology is very crucial in the processing of a case. There
are 3 specific laws related to admissibility of forensic psychology in court of law. ”

·         Sec 84 of IPC is related to an act of a person of unsound mind.

·         Indian Lunacy Act (1912) was introduced to amend laws related to lunacy and define
certain terms.
·         The Mental Health Act (MHA) (1987) was enacted for improving hospitality and
treatment towards mentally ill people keeping in mind to protect the human rights of
individuals.

“ Indulgence of Forensic Psychology in court proceedings help in assessment of mental

condition, prediction of violence and risk-management, assessment of child custody in
divorce and competency to stand trial.

Wildlife crimes are yet another commonly occurring crime, but are least noticed. It is because
they take place at remote locations devoid of any witness and surveillance. The Wildlife
Protection Act (1972) places stringent restrictions on trade for protection and conservation
of wildlife and the schedules of this act are dedicated to wildlife forensics in specific and
protocols to be followed.

Entering into the new millennium of 2000s, there was global advancement in fields of science
and technology and criminal activities took a new dimension. It was necessary for the law to
be updated with necessary amendments. It was the beginning of the era of cyber
crime. Information and Technology (IT) Act (2000) was enacted to provide legislation in
the booming cyber space. The second schedule of this act specifically deals with computer
crime in India.

·         Sec 2(t) of IT act defines electronic data.

·         An amendment in IT act in 2008, gives importance to communication devices

under Sec 2(ha).

 Few terms were foreign to the Indian law and they needed proper definitions. Expressions
like ‘digital signature’, ‘certifying authority’, ‘electronic record , ‘secure network’ and
‘subscription’ had their meanings assigned clearly while preparing the IT act in 2000.

In the recent days, with the increase in awareness and vigilance, most criminal investigation
investigations and trials are relied upon forensic science for standard protocols and proper
proceeding of the cases. Forensic science is still not known to everybody and people lack
awareness about it. The existing laws and amendments allow forensic evidence to be
admissible in the court of law. Evidence shall be cross examined and accepted by the court
based on the admissibility standard as mentioned in the law books. In the future, there shall
be amendments made and laws introduced considering the contemporary crime scenario and
technological advancements. ”
LEGAL PROVISIONS SUPPORTING CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATION
“ In India, the application of forensic science to crime investigation and trial has to stand the
limitation of law. The predominant questions therein are: viz.

How far such techniques are legitimate and supported by any authority?

How far these forensic techniques helpful in crime investigation?

How could we obtain evidentiary importance from the forensic experts?

As per Articles 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, no person accused of any offence shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself. Article 20(3) is based upon the presumption drawn
by law that the accused person is innocent till proved guilty. It defends the accused by
protecting him from the probable agony/torture during investigation during detention. ”

Criminal law believes an accused as innocent until his guilt is proved beyond reasonable
doubt. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11, ‘Right to the presumption of
innocence’ states that  “Everyone charged with a penal Offence has the right to be presumed
innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the
guarantees necessary for his defence.”2

“ Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India guarantees fundamental right against self
incrimination and guards against forcible testimony of any witness. The fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 20 (3) is a protective umbrella against testimonial compulsion in
respect of persons accused of an offence to be witness against themselves. The protection is
available not only in respect of evidence given in a trial before Court but also at previous
stage. The protection against self-incrimination envisaged in Article 20 (3) is available only
when compulsion is used and not against voluntary statement, disclosure or production of
document or other material3. This right has been taken to ensure that a person is not bound to
answer any question or produce any document or thing if that material would have the
tendency to expose the person to conviction for a crime.

2
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, United Nations High Commissioner For Human
Rights,http://www.icnl.org/research/library/files/Transnational/UNIVERSAL_DECLARATION_OF_HUMAN
_RI GHTS.pdf
3
Justice U.C. Shrivastava, Immunity from Self-Incrimination under Art. 20(3) of the Constitution of India,
JJTRI, U.P., http://ijtr.nic.in/articles/art19.pd
Sec. 73 of the Indian Evidence Act gives authority to the court to direct any person including
an accused to allow his finger impressions to be taken. The Supreme Court has also held that
being compelled to give fingerprints does not violate the constitutional safeguards given in
Art. 20(3). 4”

“ There are undoubtedly many queries as to whether forensic evidence violates Art. 20(3) of
Indian Constitution or not? In The State of Bombay v. KathiKaluOghad& Others,5  the court
held that giving thumb impression, specimen signature, blood, hair, semen etc. by the accused
do not amount to ‘being a witness’ within the meaning of the said Article. The accused,
therefore, has no right to object to DNA examination for the purposes of investigation and
trial. ”

The Bombay High Court in another significant verdict in the case of, Ramchandra Reddy and
Ors. v.State of Maharashtra,6 “upheld the legality of the use of P300 or Brain finger-printing,
lie- detector test and the use of truth serum or narco analysis. The court upheld a special court
order allowing SIT to conduct scientific tests on the accused in the fake stamp paper scam
including the main accused, Abdul Karim Telgi. The verdict also maintained that the
evidence procured under the effect of truth serum is also admissible.”

In a 2006 judgment, Dinesh Dalmia v State7, “the Madras High Court held that subjecting an
accused to narco-analysis does not tantamount to testimony by compulsion. However, in a
subsequent case, i.e., Selvi & Ors v. State of Karnataka & Anr 8, the Supreme Court
questioned the legitimacy of the involuntary administration of certain scientific techniques
for the purpose  of improving investigation efforts in criminal cases. In the above mentioned
case, the Supreme Court held that brain mapping and polygraph tests were inconclusive and
thus their compulsory usage in a criminal investigation would be unconstitutional.”

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was amended in 2005 to facilitate the assortment of a
host of medical details from accused persons upon their arrest. Section 53 of the Criminal
Procedure Code 1976 provides that upon arrest, an accused person may be subjected to a
medical examination if there are “reasonable grounds for believing” that such examination

4
McDougall, Justice Robert, The Privilege against Self-incrimination: a time for reassessment , Paper presented
at New South Wales Bar Association, 18 October
2008, http://www.supremecourt.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/supremecourt/documents/pdf/mcdougall1810
08.pdf,
5
AIR 1961 SC 1808, 1962 SCR (3) 10.
6
2004 All MR (Cri) 1704.
7
2006 Cri. L. J 2401
8
AIR 2010 SC 1974.
will afford evidence as to the crime. The extent of this assessment was expanded in 2005 to
include “the examination of blood, blood-stains, semen, swabs in case of sexual offences,
sputum and sweat, hair samples and finger nail clippings by the use of modern and scientific
techniques including DNA profiling and such other tests which the registered medical
practitioner thinks necessary in a particular case.”9

“ On the other hand, the provision that was introduced through an Amendment in 2005 is
restricted to the cases related to rape only. This section also does not permit a complainant to
collect blood, semen, etc, for bringing criminal charges against the accused; neither does it
apply to complaint cases. In similar lines, Section 164A Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
offers for the medical examination of a woman who is an alleged victim of rape within
twenty four hours and such examination includes the DNA profiling of the woman. Both the
sections allow any medical practitioner within the meaning of Sec. 2(h) Indian Medical
Council Act, 1956 to collect a DNA sample. The matter lies as to whether every medical
practitioner is competent enough to collect and preserve DNA evidence or not. It is a
renowned fact that DNA evidence is completely dependent upon suitable collection and
preservation of sample. Any simple error or negligence can contaminate the sample and
contaminated sample is absolutely of no use. ”

Under Indian Evidence Act, 1872, forensic report is regarded as a belief tendered by expert.
An expert may be defined as a person who, by practice and observation, has become
experienced in any science or in his area of expertise. He is one who has devoted time and
knowledge to a special branch of learning, and is thus especially skilled in that field wherein
he is called to give his expert judgment. The real function of the expert is to put before the
court all the equipments, together with explanations which induce him to come to a certain
conclusion, so that the court, although not an expert, may form its own judgment by its own
observation of those equipments. The trustworthiness of an expert witness completely
depends on the reasons stated in support of conclusion and the tools, techniques and
materials, which form the basis of such conclusion. Although, the court can completely
disagree with the conclusions drawn by the expert and depend on other evidences for the
purpose of judgment.

The National Draft Policy on Criminal Justice Reforms has suggested that Indian Evidence
Act needs some amendments to make scientific evidences admissible as ‘substantive

9
http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/India_DNA_Bill_Memo_2.0.pdf,
evidence’ rather than ‘opinion evidence’ and establish its probative value, depending on the
sophistication of the concerned scientific discipline.

ADMISSIBILITY OF FORENSIC SCIENCE IN INDIAN COURT

ROOMS
“ Section 45 and 46 of Indian Evidence Act gives a brief about admissibility of forensic report
in court room. The ingredients of Section 45 and 46 are:

 Whenever the court feels necessary will put faith on skilled individuals who have
technical and field knowledge about the facts so discussed in the case.

 The court will rely upon the report presented by the official or expert who has
concluded his results through various techniques with bona fide intention.

 Whatever evidence which appears irrelevant to the court but seems relevant by the
opinion of the expert will be given relevance because of such opinion. ”

“ Various cases of India were forensics reports were not only admitted but also justice was
rendered solely relying on such reports are:

In the case of Kishan Chand Vs State of Himachal Pradesh, the accused was tried for the
offence of committing rape of a child between 10-12 years and was convicted for the offence
by the help of forensic reports by experts corroborated with the circumstances. The
techniques used by the RFSL of Mandi were DNA profiling, Benzidine test, Gel-diffusion
technique and Acid Phosphatese test. 10 ”

Also in the case of Mukesh and ors. Vs State of Delhi “the accused were acquitted of charges
of dowry and were saved from the false allegations of wife who said she had been subjected
to dowry cruelty and has been poisoned whereas the forensic report clearly shows that there
was no poison in her stomach after conducting the tests of Toxicology and ballistics. Etc.”11

This shows how forensic report helps in deciding cases but though there are some cases
where it has been totally neglected by the judges either in pressure or because of lack of
corroborated evidences to sustain the report. In the Famous Aarushi Talwar case or the Noida
10
Kishan chand vs state of Himachal Pradesh on 16th March 2018 Cr. Appeal No. 620 of 2015. Available at:
https://indiankanoon .org/doc/12552359/.
11
Mukesh and ors. Vs State of Delhi, Delhi High Court, 15th December 2014. Crl. A. No. 784 of 2008.
Available at: https://www.casemine.com/judgment/in/5bc2329b9eff430e946ab654
double murder case the victims parents were alleged for her murder and their servant. They
were alleged of honor killing, though forensic reports coupled with the narcotics test denied
the act but as there was media pressure and no other evidences were found they were
convicted. 17Â Many such cases are there were forensic reports are not presented even
though required and judgment is rendered without considering the medical aspect of the
victim.

Thus, Indian laws have lacuna while considering the forensic aspect. Though there is a
concept in the Indian legal system that forensic report is the pedestal of the investigation with
the charge-sheet formed by the police, still the Indian courts neglect it and refuse to consider
it as a sole evidence because of the orthodox thinking that India being an corrupted state
where forensic reports can be tempered by just paying a handful of money to the
investigating officers or else they consider eye-witnesses as a pure and steady evidence on
which they can rely upon. Not only India does not consider the positive effects of Forensic
Science but also does not want to upgrade its legal system with foreign methods as it still
believes in punishment rather than restorative justice (still a peripheral concept for the Indian
legal system).

Unlike defects in Indian legal System we also have certain Drawbacks of current Forensic
Science application:

1. It lacks scientific certainty as because of human intervention it becomes subjective to

the investigative officer and also the labs are not well equipped with the new
advanced machines or techniques.

2. The Indian forensic department lacks research as compared to other countries.

3. Forensic science though is a developing field in the world, India still lack
participation of people and thus it remains neglected.

4. The rates of bribe, bias and partisanship are escalating because the scientists lack
ethical codes.

5. The Indian forensic department lacks technical staff which hinders the reliability of
the report and so on.
CONCLUSION:
“ In Indian scenario, there has been increased emphasis on the use of such technologies in
criminal investigation and trials. The Commissions appointed on reforms of criminal justice
have reiterated that the infusion of technology in crime detection can help the system to
function efficiently. The relevant laws have been amended from time to time to make way for
use of forensic technologies in crime investigation and trial. Yet, it may be said that there are
existent flaws in the laws which need to be addressed. The courts are also reluctant to rely on
scientific evidence due to their restrictive approach, or certain inherent defects in the
evidence as produced in courts which deter them from relying on it entirely. The main motto
of criminal justice system is to provide fair justice. Undoubtedly, forensic evidence is more
authentic than ocular evidence. Forensic science being scientific evidence is a boon for
criminal justice system. We have to overcome the existing flaws to step forward.”

“ We must learn from the past, disrupt our thinking, strengthen the community and change our
culture. This means working together towards a resolution of the scientific deficiencies
within existing forensic evidence while providing a firm basis for new innovative
technologies entering into the forensic science ecosystem. At the same time, we need to
ensure that the law enforcement and investigative communities once again recognize and use
forensic science to its full potential as a holistic problem-solving tool (for example, through
the use of the case assessment and interpretation methodology). That such a methodology is
embedded within a framework which allows for an understanding of the contribution that a
specific evidence type could meaningfully deliver in terms of sub-source, source, activity or
offence-level propositions for a given set of case specific circumstances rather than restricting
it to a siloed one-dimensional reactive process becomes obvious. A contextualized means of
evaluative reporting of forensic science data pertinent to a particular case but held in the
context of that case where alternative propositions can be attended to and challenged
correctly, works to fulfil this problem-solving potential. Such an approach has been suggested

by the Association of Forensic Science Providers among others.”