Author – Nikita Patidar Student at Institute of Law, Nirma University
TO THE POINT
The article discusses the legal admissibility, ethical issues, and regulatory requirements of forensic science in Indian criminal investigations. It identifies the advantages and disadvantages of relying on scientific evidence in trials.
ABSTRACT
The present article analyses the increasing involvement of forensic science in India’s criminal justice system, tracing how DNA analysis, digital forensics, and biometric methods assist in collection of evidence and trial procedures. It analyses legal admissibility according to the Indian Evidence Act, ethical issues related to privacy and consent, and the urgent necessity for regulatory standards and lab accountability. With Indian case laws and comparative perspectives, it reconciles the utilities of scientific inquiry with threats of abuse and constitutional violations.
USE OF LEGAL
The article uses legal reasoning mainly via Sections 45–46 of the Indian Evidence Act, judicial precedents such as Sharda v Dharmpal and Banarsi Dass v Teeku Dutta regarding DNA admissibility and constitutional principles via Article 21 (Right to Privacy) reinforced in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v Union of India. It also examines the 2022 amendments to the Identification of Prisoners Act and assesses the DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019, on the basis of alignment with legal protection.
THE PROOF
Evidence of the arguments of the article is manifested in real-life illustrations and verdicts. It quotes enhanced conviction rates in Maharashtra based on forensic enhancements, Andhra Pradesh’s training initiatives, and failures in the Aarushi Talwar case. Judicial evidence is rooted in court decisions permitting forensic evidence conditionally, emphasizing due process, consent, and probative value. The article quotes international best practices and loopholes in India’s forensic governance regime.
INTRODUCTION
Forensic science has a pivotal function in the contemporary criminal justice system, facilitating the identification of criminals, the verification of witness accounts, and the vindication of innocents. Its growing entwinement with policing and prosecution is propelled by the development of DNA technology, digital forensics, and biometrics. In India, the pressure for forensic-based investigation is now enshrined in reforms under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), to be replacing portions of the Criminal Procedure Code. But with its advantages comes the issue of legal admissibility, procedural failures, and ethical concerns like privacy, data storage, and profiling. This article discusses the role of forensic science in terms of legal frameworks, its value as evidence, and ethical challenges.
ROLE OF FORENSIC SCIENCE IN CONTEMPORARY INVESTIGATIONS
Forensic science strengthens criminal investigations’ credibility and effectiveness. By methods like DNA profiling, fingerprinting, ballistic analysis, and toxicology, investigators are able to obtain objective scientific proof. The Government of India has progressed impressively to institutionalize forensic assistance by introducing new Central Forensic Science Laboratories (CFSLs) and implementing the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita which makes forensic collection compulsory for crimes punishable with seven or more years of imprisonment.
As per reports, Maharashtra enhanced its conviction rate to 54% in 2025 with better forensic casework and digital infrastructure. Even police training courses in Andhra Pradesh have started including forensic sampling protocols to minimize procedural errors. All this is a testimony to a shift towards evidence-based policing. The forensic lab capacity, backlog, and requirement of appropriate training, though, continue to hinder uniform implementation.
LEGAL ADMISSIBILITY AND RELIABILITY
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, specifically Section 45 and 46, regulates the admissibility of expert views, such as forensic evidence. Although courts recognize the science-based reliability of methods such as DNA analysis, admissibility depends on procedural safeguards such as chain of custody, sample integrity, and qualifications of experts. In Sharda v Dharmpal, DNA testing to establish paternity was permitted by the Supreme Court but it emphasized consent and balancing of interests. Likewise, in Banarsi Dass v Teeku Dutta, the Court stressed again that DNA tests should not be aimed as of right but where essential to justice.
Though useful, forensic evidence is not perfect. In the Aarushi Talwar case, there were several lapses, such as contamination and inconclusive laboratory reports, resulting in acquittal. These types of cases show that in the absence of strict standards, forensic evidence can confuse instead of shed light. The judiciary has also been concerned with over-reliance on expert evidence without corroboration, emphasizing the necessity for strict judicial examination.
ETHICAL DILEMMAS AND PRIVACY RIGHTS
Forensic science use frequently entails sensitive information—DNA, fingerprints, iris scans—raising substantial privacy and consent concerns. In India, the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 (recently amended in 2022), enables police to gather biometric and biological information, in many cases, without the accused person’s consent. While it helps make investigation stronger, it also threatens infringement upon personal liberty.
The intended DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019 aims to establish a regulatory regime for DNA profiling. Critics point out that the Bill does not have enough protection on data storage, use restriction, and rights of individuals. The lack of an all-encompassing data protection law in India compounds these issues even further. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v Union of India, the Supreme Court confirmed the right to privacy as a constitutional right under Article 21. The use of DNA without informed consent may infringe this right, especially in acquitted individuals or children.
There are also fears of misuse of forensic databases for caste, religious, or political dissent-based profiling. Lacking appropriate controls, there is a risk of perpetuating systemic biases in the name of scientific objectivity. Ethical practice requires transparency, data minimisation, and stringent accountability measures.
ENSURING ACCURACY, ACCOUNTABILITY & REGULATION
In order to achieve the potential of forensic science and avoid its risks, rigorous regulatory regimes are necessary. The DNA Bill makes provision for a DNA Regulatory Board, but its powers are restricted, and it gives the government considerable leeway. In addition, the Bill is devoid of explicit provisions for compensation in the event of abuse or violation of data.
The call for standardisation of forensic practice is urgent. It has been reported that the majority of forensic laboratories in India are not accredited by the National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL). Regular audit, manuals of protocols, and cross-laboratory validation need to be made compulsory. Reforms in law should also include statutory provision for forensic laboratories to produce methods used, error rates, and qualifications of experts in court.
Additionally, judicial education to critically assess forensic evidence is essential. Courts ought not receive forensic reports as gospel but subject their foundation and susceptibility to error or manipulation. Developing an independent forensic watchdog agency would assist in shielding labs from police or political pressure, making them more objective.
CONCLUSION
Forensic science, when properly used, can greatly enhance criminal investigations and assure just trials. India’s initiative to increase its forensic infrastructure and involve scientific evidence in statutory law is noteworthy. Legal admissibility, however, rests not just on scientific validity but also on compliance with procedural safeguards and observance of constitutional rights.
The success of forensic science should not be tested by conviction rates alone but by the role it plays in securing fair, unbiased, and respect-for-rights justice. To that end, strong regulatory control, privacy safeguards, training, and accountability measures are necessary. It can work as a faithful friend of justice only by finding the balance of efficiency and ethics.
FAQs
Q 1: Can Indian courts depend entirely on forensic evidence?
A: Yes, provided there is backing from procedural protection and supporting facts.
Q 2: Is forensic evidence admissible in law in India?
A: Yes, as per Sections 45–46 of the Indian Evidence Act, provided there is credibility of experts and chain of custody.
Q3: Are privacy concerns regarding forensic data collection?
A: Yes, particularly under the Identification of Prisoners Act and in the absence of a strong data protection law.
Q4: Can abuse of forensic science be avoided?
A: Yes, by statute, expert control, and judicial examination of scientific technique.
