The Admissibility Of The Forensic Evidence In The Indian Criminal Court - A Question On Its Reliability

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Criminal Law

Published: 2026-08-23T21:13:13.513365+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:06:02.639+00:00

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE FORENSIC EVIDENCE IN

THE INDIAN CRIMINAL COURT - A QUESTION ON ITS

RELIABILITY

Vishal Patel, B.B.A. LL.B. (H), Department of Law, School of Legal Studies, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow

ABSTRACT

There is no question that the forensic science in the field of criminal law is not less than a boon. It has provided multiple tools for an investigating authority to reach the conclusion of the any criminal investigation. Forensic Science is branch of the science which work law to analyse the evidence or find new evidence which can’t be easily retrieve without the help of scientific intervention. And any evidence which is retrieved through or any evidence which were analysed by forensic science can be termed as Forensic Evidence. These evidences are admitted on the court with forensic expert opinion. But the recent trends questioned about the reliability of these evidence in the eye of the court. These trends pointed that the forensic evidence cannot be reliable for holding any individual liable for any criminal liability.

This paper discusses the admissibility and credibility of forensic evidence in the Indian legal system, it also highlights the provisions established under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and also the difficulties encountered in upholding its reliability. It also discusses major factors influencing reliability, such as improper evidence handling, lack of standardized protocols, and cognitive biases among forensic professionals. The paper also discusses the evolution of forensic science from its early roots to contemporary methods such as DNA typing and artificial intelligencebased crime analysis. In an attempt to promote the credibility of forensic evidence, the paper identifies repeatability and reproducibility as essential, and proposes steps such as common training schemes, the adoption of advanced technologies, and worldwide standardization of forensic methods.

The paper concludes with recommendations for improving forensic science, including better training, stricter protocols, and increased collaboration with international forensic bodies. Keywords: Forensic Evidence, Reliability, Indian Criminal Justice System, Admissibility, Forensic Science.

INTRODUCTION

Forensic science plays a crucial role in India's criminal justice system, providing scientific methods to analyse evidence that would otherwise be difficult to obtain through conventional investigative techniques. Some commonly used methods are DNA profiling, fingerprint analysis, ballistic examination, and digital forensics. These methods vary in effectiveness, with different methods having some advantages and some disadvantages. The reliability of forensic evidence in Indian courts has been questioned in many cases recently although the continuous improvements over the past decade in Forensic science were made which were influenced by advancements in technology and increased awareness about forensic science. The challenges such as improper handling of evidence, lack of standardized protocols, and limited resources continue to affect reliability.

The reliability concerns in forensic evidence primarily grow from issues like contamination either through mistake or being tampered, misinterpretation of results, and inadequate training of forensic professionals. These problems are often aid by a lack of infrastructure and resources to support comprehensive forensic analysis. The legal framework governing the admissibility of forensic evidence in India includes several key standards, such as the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, now replaced by Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which outlines the criteria for evidence admissibility. When compared to international standards, India's regulations are still evolving and often lack the rigorous enforcement seen in countries with more established forensic practices.

To enhance the credibility of forensic evidence, India needs to implement measures such as establishing standardized procedures, improving forensic laboratories' infrastructure, and ensuring continuous training and certification for forensic scientists. Additionally, increased collaboration with international forensic bodies can help align India's practices with global standards, thereby improving overall reliability and accuracy.

FORENSIC

SCIENCE

IN THE

CRIMINAL

INVESTIGATION AND

IT'S

EVOLUTION

Forensic science plays a crucial role in criminal investigations by applying scientific principles to analyse physical evidence, identify suspects, and reconstruct crime scenes. It integrates multiple disciplines, such as biology, chemistry, physics, and digital forensics, to ensure accurate and reliable conclusions. Modern forensic techniques, including DNA analysis,

fingerprint matching, ballistics, toxicology, and digital evidence recovery, have significantly improved the ability of law enforcement agencies to solve crimes. The history of forensic science can be traced into the ancient roman era, where a physicist Antistius performed an autopsy of the Julius Caesar, who was stabbed 23 times, the Antistius was able to determine that, Julius Caesar was killed due to the second stab in his breast. 1 The Ancient Greeks were among the first to establish the cause of murder by the way of examining the toxins and their effect on body. 2 During the 13th Century, the Song Chi in his book named as Collected Cases of Injustice Rectified or Washing Away of Wrongs, this book was based on the real incident which were linked with his scientific knowledge to avoid injustice in the future.

3 It also contain some scientific knowledge about post mortem examination, emergency treatment, cause of death etc. The formal development of the forensic science began in the 18th Century, one of the earlies milestone was that in 1814, a Mathieu Orfila, a Spanish chemist, published a treatise on poisons, laying the foundation for forensic toxicology. 4 In 1835, Scottish scientist Henry Goddard pioneered forensic ballistics by linking bullets to specific firearms using distinctive marks. 5 Later in the 20th century marked significant advancements in forensic science, including the establishment of fingerprint classification (1901)6, forensic pathology labs, and the expansion of forensic toxicology in major cases. 7 The polygraph test emerged in the 1920s, while DNA fingerprinting (1984) revolutionized criminal investigations.

In 21st century, forensic science refines and continues to evolve with biometric technology, forensic genetics, and AI-driven crime analysis. The future upholds the integration of machine learning for ancestry inference and advancements in forensic anthropology, entomology, toxicology, and digital forensics further enhance investigative capabilities. 1 Nigar Aliyeva, “History of Forensic Science,” in D. Rawtani, C. M. Hussain (eds. ), Technology in Forensic Science: Sampling, Analysis, Data and Regulations 5 (John Wiley & Sons, 2020).

2 Ibid.

3 History and Development of Forensic Science, available at: https://www.sifs.in/blog-details/history-of-forensicscience (last visited March 12, 2025).

4 Spyros N. Michaleas et al., “Mathieu Joseph Bonaventure Orfila (1787-1853): The Founder of Modern

Toxicology,” 17 Journal of Clinical Medicine 533 (2022). 5 Firearms Examiner Training, available at: https://nij.ojp.gov/nij-hosted-online-training-courses/firearmsexaminer-training/module-02/1800s (last visited March 12, 2025).

6 Supra Note 3.

7 Ibid.

WHAT ARE THE LAWS REGARDING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF FORENSIC

EVIDENCE IN INDIA?

In India, there is no separate framework for the admissibility of the forensic evidence in India. The Indian Criminal System, although the law on admissibility of evidence derives its authority from Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 ( previously Section 59 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872), which provides that any evidence which provide existence and non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts are declared as relevant and only relevant facts are admissible. 10 Under this act, there is no specific section, which discuss about the forensic evidence and their admissibility in any criminal proceeding or civil suit in India. But the section 3911 provides that if the court must form an opinion on the fact based on science or fingerprint impression, any expert on the matter can be called to give an opinion.

12 This section further complimented by section 4013, which provides that any such fact with the opinion of expert becomes relevant in that case. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, under Section 32914 provides the reports from designated Government scientific experts including forensic experts can be used as evidence in legal proceedings under this Sanhita. The Court may summon these experts for examination of the report.

THE RELIABILITY OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE IN QUESTION

With the advancement of time, forensic science has emerged as a crucial component of the criminal justice system. It plays a vital role in identifying, analysing, and preserving evidence, thereby aiding in crime investigation and resolution. Additionally, forensic science is instrumental in crime prevention by helping law enforcement agencies anticipate and mitigate potential criminal activities. Forensic evidence, while often perceived as scientifically infallible, is not always reliable due to a variety of factors, but following two are most impactful in affecting the

8 The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, (Act No. 47 of 2023), s.3.

9 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, (Act No. 47 of 2023), s.5.

10 The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, (Act No. 47 of 2023), s.3.

11 Id, s.39.

12 Id., s.39.

13 Id., s.40.

14 The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (Act No. 47 of 2023), s.329.

reliability of the forensic evidence.

1. Human Error and Potential for Bias

One of the important factor is Human error and subjectivity, it is well know that any forensic evidence relies on the human from collection to storage to testing and finally in the interpretation. Any mistake whether intentional or unintentional could lead to the falsification of evidence or leading to another result. In the case of Anokhi Lal v State of Madhya Pradesh15, the accused was convicted three times by session court and was sentenced to death by Special Court POCSO in 2013 and 2022, but in 2024 Supreme Court on found out that forensic report was misinterpretation, over relied and even the proper procedure for evidence collection was not followed, which resulted in the acquittal of accused. The case focussed on how an unintentional human error has resulted in wrongful conviction of the accused.

One more factor that is relevant in affecting the reliability of Forensic evidence that is Potential for Bais. There could be two types of Bais i. e. Cognitive Bais and Confirmation Bais. In USA, on the testimony on the forensic evidence of Special Agent of Federal Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter FBI) in the court which resulted in the conviction of the Donald E Gates for rape and murder, he served 28 years in the jail and also resulted in the execution of another convict Benjamin Herbert Boyle. 16 Later a report was published which suggested both of these testimony were wrong, and both Gates and Boyle were not eligible for punishment they got. 17 The report suggested that the work of that agent was flawed and have potential cognitive bias against accused. Many Indian cases such as Naveen @ Ajay v. The State of Madhya Pradesh18 and Rangpati Nayak v.

State of Chhattisgarh19 suggested that the potential conformation biasness of the forensic labs aided with other factors had resulted in undesired and unconclusive evidence and trial court hurriedly depending on this evidence had presented its judgement resulting in injustice towards accused.

2. Contamination of the Evidence and Methodological Limitation

It is a fact that collection of the evidence is not an easy task, combined with some

15 AIR 2020 SC 232

16 Jessica D. Gabel, “Realizing Reliability in Forensic Science from the Ground up,” 104 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 294–296 (2014).

17 Ibid.

18 2023 INSC 936.

19 2024 CRA/1538/2018.

mishandling can result in the potential contamination of evidence. Samples from crime scenes are frequently small and might be of poor quality because of exposure to a spectrum of environmental onslaught. 20 Reliability involves number of factors, including the procedures used, laboratory performance, laboratory record keeping, quality control and quality reassurances. 21 In the case of Bharat Kumar Kori v. State of Maharashtra22, the forensic evidence was challenged due to procedural lapses and potential bias in the analysis. The Supreme Court recognised that the forensic laboratory failed to follow proper protocols, creating a doubt on the credibility of the evidence and potential contamination. Court stressed on the need for transparency and accountability in forensic laboratories to ensure the integrity of the evidence.

Contamination can also be a result of crime lab scandals which appear to encompass errors ranging from mere negligence to outright malfeasance. 23 Some accusahightion involve evidence tampering, perjury and withholding evidence. 24 In Irfan @ Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh25, the reliability of forensic evidence was again questioned. The Supreme Court recognized significant inconsistencies in the Deoxyribonucleic acid (hereinafter DNA) evidence presented by the prosecution. The court also recognised the claims of defence such as contradictions in the DNA profiles from different samples taken from the victim, like an unexplained presence of male DNA in samples collected six days after the crime, and errors in forensic documentation, such as a typographical mistake in allele numbers that was later corrected without informing the defence.

26 The Supreme Court also takes the note that the lower courts neglect to critically examine the reliability of the forensic evidence, thus failing to uphold established judicial principles. 27 Some factors such as Methodological Limitation, affect the reliability of the forensic evidence. Also not all forensic techniques are scientifically validated. Some methods, like the bite mark analysis or hair comparison, have been questioned for lacking a strong scientific foundation. Even DNA testing is considered one of the most reliable forensic tools, sometime it can produce errors if the sample is degraded or mixed with other DNA. 20 Subhash Chandra Singh, “DNA Profiling and the Forensic Use of DNA Evidence in Criminal Proceedings,” 53 Journal of the Indian Law Institute 200 (2011).

21 Ibid.

22 2024 BHC-AS:32342-DB

23 Supra Note 16 at 302

24 Ibid.

25 2025 INSC 150.

26 Ibid.

27 Ibid.

The Contamination can also be resulted from lack of standard protocol for the collection and storage of the forensic evidence. Forensic science lacks universally accepted standards and protocols in India and around the world for the procedure regarding the collection, storage and examination of the Forensic evidence. Different laboratories can use different methods, leading to inconsistent results. In the case of Manoj & Ors. v. State of M. P. 28, it was held that if DNA evidence is not properly documented, collected, packaged, and preserved, it will not meet the legal and scientific requirements for admissibility in a court of law.

29 The extremely small samples of DNA can be used as evidence, greater attention to contamination issues is necessary while locating, collecting, and preserving DNA evidence as it can be contaminated when DNA from another source gets mixed with DNA which is relevant to the case. 30 The court observed that DNA exhibits having biological specimen, which can establish link among victim(s), suspect(s), scene of crime for solving the case should be identified, preserved, packed, and sent for DNA Profiling. 31 While forensic science has practically transformed the investigation and resolution of crimes, it is far from perfect. Human fallibility, prejudice, contamination, and methodological errors can compromise the integrity of forensic evidence. The cases discussed go on to show that errors in forensic procedures have led to miscarriages of justice and wrongful convictions.

It is thus imperative to embrace stringent protocols, be open, and continually refine forensic techniques in a bid to ensure that evidence is still valid and that justice is equally meted out.

HOW CAN BE THE RELIABILITY OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE CAN BE

INCREASED.

The integrity of forensic evidence is of utmost importance in guaranteeing that judicial proceedings are fair and of integrity. Forensic science, in recent years, has been confronted with serious challenges, such as high-profile wrongful convictions caused by flawed forensic analysis, and there are many report that revealed underlying reliability issues in a number of forensic disciplines. These challenges have underscored the necessity for comprehensive strategies for improving the reliability of forensic evidence. The reliability of the forensic evidence can be increased through integrating technological advancements, improving analytical methodologies, and strengthening legal and

28 (2023) 2 SCC 353.

29 Ibid.

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid.

ethical frameworks, but the two key factors, i. e. repeatability and reproducibility, play crucial role in judging the reliability of the forensic evidence. Repeatability refers to the reliability of measurements or conclusions by a particular examiner under the same conditions: does the same examiner give the same answer using the same instrumentation or approach if provided with the same materials a second time? 32 Repeatability of forensic evidence can be increased through introduce a universal training program for the examiner to carry out the examination in a set procedure. Another way a repeatability of a forensic evidence can be increased through introduction of technology whether it is upcoming AI technology, blockchain technology or any other form of technology which ensures the reliability of a data examined.

The combination of artificial intelligence and forensic science offers great promise for improving the accuracy and efficiency of medico-legal practice. 33 Artificial intelligence algorithms appear to reduce the problem of human subjectivity, decrease the rate of incorrect ratings, and provide costeffective solutions. 34 Repeatability can also be increased through Improved Evidence Handling and Chain of Custody, as earlier discussed that the report of forensic evidence can be inconsistent, if the evidence was not properly handled, thus good handling of these evidence is necessary. Reproducibility refers to do different examiners obtain the same measurement or reach the same conclusion when analysing the same materials? 35 Essentially, repeatability is intraexaminer reliability, whereas reproducibility is inter-examiner reliability.

36 The reproducibility of the forensic evidence can be increased by establishing standard protocol establishing uniform procedures for evidence collection, analysis, and documentation can minimize variability and improve reproducibility. The Adoption of Open Science Practices can also result in the increment of the reproducibility of the forensic evidence as sharing data, methods, and findings openly, it can enable forensic scientists for a independent verification and reduce the risk of errors or biases. 37 32 Hal S. Stern, Maria Cuellar and David Kaye, “Reliability and Validity of Forensic Science Evidence,” 16 Significance 22 (2019). 33 Minni Qi, Dan Zhou and Xiaojun Yu, “Application and Innovation of Artificial Intelligence in Forensic Medicine,” 17 Computer and Information Science 55 (2024).

34 Ibid.

35 Supra Note 32 at 23.

36 Ibid.

37 See; Jason M Chin, Gianni Ribeiro and Alicia Rairden, “Open forensic science,” 6 Journal of Law and the Biosciences 255–288 (2019).

Some Systemic issues like funding constraints and publication biases can also hinder reproducibility. These challenges can also be needed to be addressed, it can be addressed through collective action from funding agencies, journals, and institutions. The Global Standardisation for the collection and examination of forensic evidence plays key role in increasing the reproducibility of the forensic evidence, increasing overall all reliability of forensic evidence. The INTERPOL and the International Association of Forensic Sciences (IAFS) and similar organisation can facilitate collaboration on standardized protocols. These international standards help ensure that forensic evidence collected in one country can be reliably interpreted and used in another, enhancing global justice cooperation.

CONCLUSION

Forensic science has revolutionized criminal investigations, providing scientific tools to uncover the truth. However, the reliability of forensic evidence in the light of recent cases have been questioned. The Factors such as human error, cognitive biases, mishandling of evidence, and the absence of standardized procedures, are responsible for the questioning of the reliability of the forensic evidence. These flaws in the forensic evidence as seen in the cases have led to the conviction of wrong person. For enhancement of the reliability of forensic evidence, it is essential to focus on repeatability and reproducibility. Repeatability of a forensic evidence can be improved through universal training programs for forensic examiners, the integration of AI and blockchain technologies, and better evidence handling practices.

On the other side, the reproducibility of a forensic evidence can be enhanced by establishing standardized protocols for evidence collection, analysis, and documentation, as well as adopting open science practices that allow for independent verification of results. Additionally, addressing systemic issues such as funding constraints and publication biases is crucial for improving the overall reliability of forensic evidence. International collaboration and the adoption of global standards, facilitated by organizations like INTERPOL and the International Association of Forensic Sciences (IAFS), can also play a significant role in ensuring that forensic evidence is consistently reliable across borders.

In conclusion, while forensic science has the potential to be a cornerstone of the criminal justice system, its reliability must be safeguarded through continuous improvement, rigorous standards, and the integration of technological advancements. Only then can forensic evidence truly serve as a reliable tool for delivering justice.