Forensic Justice: Paradigm to an Ideal Justice System

Cathriene M. Abraham1

1 Student of LL.M.(CLCJ) at School of Law, Forensic Justice and

Policy Studies

Abstract

Forensic science is a domain that has witnessed a tremendous surge in its

development since its inception. Forensic science, commonly known as
criminalistics, utilises scientific methods and techniques to gather, preserve,
and analyse physical evidence from crime scenes to verify facts that can be
employed in legal proceedings. Since the dawn of society, crime and offenders
have concurrently evolved and assumed diverse forms. As the number of
offences continues to rise, humans have conceived methods to assist courts in
proving the guilt of the accused. The incorporation of technology into the
courts by stakeholders of law enforcement mechanisms has significantly
improved the process of delivering justice. It has led to a more streamlined
and effective system that benefits all the concerned parties. Forensics is one
such advancement that aids the court in corroborating the evidence found at a
crime scene. It assists the court in verifying the facts put forth by the counsel
by examining the samples discovered concerning the accused and the victim.
Notwithstanding their utility, they pose ethical challenges such as evidence
mishandling, ambiguous methods, and privacy breaches. The courts must
address these concerns responsibly and ethically when deploying these
technologies. Thus, it is essential for investigating agencies and individuals to
be sensitised to the proper preservation and handling of evidence.

By underlining this premise, this research would delve into the role of forensic
science in the effective implementation of law and order. The study will utilise
a qualitative methodology to explore the past progression of forensic
jurisprudence and its contemporary standing in India. This paper shall
furthermore deal with the paradigm of forensic justice in the Indian legal
system and its collation with the forensic justice system in other parts of the
world. Moreover, it would likewise address the requirement for procedures
and guidelines essential to maintain the integrity and sanctity of the
evidence. Thus, the object of this research is to examine the scope of how
forensic science plays a vital role in the successful implementation of law
enforcement.

Keywords: Forensic Science, Evidence, Law Enforcement, Justice, Legal

Proceedings.

Introduction:

Forensic science is a branch of science that has been providing legal aid to
courts for over a millennia. The term forensic derives its root from the Latin
word forensis, meaning a forum. Forensic science and justice are two
domains that are intertwined and embedded, and the co-existence of both
these terms is essential in identifying and resolving crimes, assuring
equitable and impartial administration of justice, and preserving social
security. Forensic science is generally defined as the application of scientific
methods and techniques to assist criminal justice, specifically those
concerning the collection, examination, and interpretation of physical
evidence. The application of forensic science has helped to solve complex
cases, exonerate the innocent, and ensure that justice is served. Forensic
science is any science involved in legal matters. Forensic scientists are relied
upon to provide an unbiased, scientific study to uncover the truth and
pursue justice in a court proceeding.

Now moving on to the term justice, numerous philosophers have defined

justice in a variety of ways. Each proponent of justice has provided
principles based on their beliefs and cultural and societal background.
Justice, in Plato’s view, is a virtue that establishes a system of reasoned
order in which each component plays its part without interfering with the
operation of the others. Thomas Hobbes argued that it is an artificial virtue,
crucial to human society, and a function of the social contract’s voluntary
agreements. In legal parlance, justice refers to fairness and equity amongst
individuals within a legal system. The virtue of a State to provide just,
reasonable, and fair opportunities and rights, and imposing sanctions upon
violation of such rights can be defined as justice. It evolves from the
principles of the rule of law and due process while safeguarding the
individual rights of citizens. Maintaining law and order, bringing delinquents
to justice, and making sure punishments are fair and suitable fall under the
purview of the criminal justice system.

Thus, incorporating these two terms, forensic justice can be deemed a

specialised discipline that aims to dispense justice by employing an
expansive spectrum of forensic science techniques. With the advancement of
technology and the progression of society, the tools utilised for crime
detection have undergone significant evolution. Over time, various forensic
examination methods have emerged. These techniques have become
increasingly sophisticated and have played a crucial role in the
administration of the criminal justice system. Forensic science has
expanded its scope to encompass a diverse range of fields, ranging from
psychology to accounting. Among the numerous branches that have
emerged within this discipline are:

1. Forensic Anthropology- It is a specialised field of study that involves

the examination of human skeletal remains and other biological
materials to ascertain the circumstances surrounding an individual’s
death. Additionally, this discipline plays a crucial role in
distinguishing between human and animal bones.
2. Forensic Toxicology- It is an area that involves the study of poisons
and toxins, including drugs. The resulting report can yield crucial
insights into the nature of substances present within an individual, as
well as whether the quantity of such substances is within the bounds
of a therapeutic dosage or exceeds a potentially harmful threshold.
3. Digital Forensics is a scientific approach utilised by investigating
officers to identify, preserve, and document digital evidence for
presentation in a court of law. Such evidence is often collected in
 cases involving cyberbullying, child pornography, and other crimes
that use computers and other related instruments as a weapon.
4. Forensic Odontology is a field of study that applies dental science to
the administration of law and justice. It involves the examination of
bite marks on rape victims and the determination of teeth and jaw
positioning.
5. Forensic Linguistics is an interdisciplinary field that employs
linguistic analysis in the investigation of criminal activities and legal
proceedings. Linguistics, as a scientific discipline, encompasses a
comprehensive study of language, including its cognitive, social,
cultural, psychological, environmental, biological, grammatical, and
structural aspects.
6. Forensic psychology is a field that integrates the principles and
practices of psychology with the legal system. It involves the
application of psychological knowledge and expertise to various
aspects of the justice system. The scope of forensic psychology is
broad and may include the assessment of an individual’s competency
to stand trial, the provision of recommendations for sentencing, the
provision of expert testimony, the evaluation of child custody
arrangements, participation in jury selection, and the delivery of
psychotherapeutic interventions to criminal offenders. Forensic
psychologists employ various techniques, including Brain Electrical
Oscillation Signature Profiling (BEOS) and brain mapping, to
investigate and analyse the neural activity of individuals.

The aforementioned represent a limited selection from the extensive array of

branches within the field. The methodology employed is dependent upon the
specific attributes of the case and the type of evidence being examined,
indicating that procedures may differ on a case-by-case basis.

Literature Review
Forensic science is an essential component in the investigation and
resolution of criminal proceedings. Its interdisciplinary nature underscores
the importance of collaboration among forensic scientists, law enforcement
agencies, and other legal professionals (Saferstein, R., 2004). Additionally,
Caddy, B. (2012) highlights the significant contribution of forensic science in
criminal investigations by providing scientific evidence that either
corroborates or challenges hypotheses. The importance of adhering to
rigorous scientific methodologies and quality assurance practices in forensic
laboratories could not be disdained, as it was essential in assuring the
integrity and reliability of forensic evidence.

Koehler, J. J. (2018) delves into the base rate fallacy, a prevalent error in
forensic evidence analysis. It examines the difficulties that arise in
comprehending and utilising base rates in forensic science and emphasises
the significance of incorporating both the prior probability and the likelihood
ratio in the assessment of forensic evidence. Likewise, he stresses the need
for forensic scientists to exercise caution in the interpretation and
presentation of evidence while taking into consideration the base rates and
the potential for cognitive biases. Gunn, J., and Evans, R. (2008) suggested
a comprehensive view outlining the principles of forensic justice in the
twenty-first century. It delved into the historical evolution of forensic science
and its influence on the criminal justice system. The authors emphasised
the importance of addressing the challenges and limitations of forensic
evidence, including concerns related to reliability, bias, and interpretation.
They advocated for a collaborative effort among scientists, lawyers, and
policymakers to accomplish the same.

An analysis was conducted to study the essence of ethics and integrity in

forensic investigations. It underscored the imperative for forensic experts to
adhere to ethical norms to guarantee precision and dependability. The study
stressed the cruciality of formulating unambiguous protocols and
supervisory frameworks to deter unethical conduct and uphold the
confidence of the public in the forensic justice system (Smith, J., and
Johnson, A. 2010). Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003) investigated the psychological
impact underlying interrogations, confessions, and testimony was carried
out. It contemplated various factors that affect the dependability and
precision of confessional statements, including the implementation of
coercive methods and the susceptibility of suspects. Additionally, it probed
into the repercussions of an erroneous confession on the judicial system
and proposed approaches for enhancing the investigative procedure.
Besides, Garrett, B. L. (2011) glanced at the root causes of wrongful
convictions in the United States. It investigated the contributing factors that
led to such errors, including but not confined to eyewitness
misidentification, false confessions, and flawed forensic evidence. Through
an extensive analysis of numerous cases, the author exposes the
inadequacies of the criminal justice system that have resulted in wrongful
convictions. It examined the implications of these errors on the fairness and
integrity of the justice system.

A study undertook critical research on the role of forensic science in the

criminal justice system of India. It delved into the importance of forensic
evidence in criminal investigations and brought to light the challenges
encountered in its application. The study highlighted the imperative for the
integration of forensic science into the criminal justice system to guarantee
equitable and precise outcomes. It recommended the establishment of
dedicated forensic units, training initiatives for law enforcement personnel,
and the formulation of standardised protocols for evidence collection and
analysis (Chaudhary, A., & Chaudhary, S., 2017).

Kaur, R., and Kaur, R. (2017) presented a comprehensive analysis of the

current state of forensic science in India. The review noted the pressing need
for enhanced infrastructure, training, and collaboration among forensic
professionals to augment the quality and reliability of forensic evidence in
the Indian criminal justice system. Furthermore, Kaur, R., and Sharma, A.
(2017) have stated in their research that despite the significant progress
made in forensic science in India, many challenges demand attention. These
challenges encompass the absence of adequate infrastructure, insufficient
training of forensic experts, and the necessity for standardised protocols and
procedures.

The historical evolution of forensic science in India, the current challenges

faced by forensic experts under the Indian Evidence Act, and the
advancements in forensic techniques have also been considered by the
authors. Kumar, A., & Sharma, A. (2017) presented an exhaustive synopsis
of the current state of forensic science in India and offered insights into its
prospects. The authors examined manifold challenges confronted by forensic
experts, which included limited resources, outdated techniques, and a lack
of coordination among various stakeholders. They also highlighted the
potential of emerging technologies, such as DNA profiling and digital
forensics, in enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of forensic
investigations. They emphasised the importance of adopting modern
techniques and technologies to augment the capabilities of forensic experts.
Furthermore, they stress the need for collaboration between forensic science
institutions, law enforcement agencies, and the judiciary to ensure the
effective utilisation of forensic evidence in criminal investigations and court
proceedings. Sarkar, A., and Chakraborty, S. (2016) deliberate on the
obstacles encountered in DNA analysis within the Indian judicial system.
The discourse delves into the complexities surrounding the acquisition,
conservation, and examination of DNA evidence, as well as the elucidation
and demonstration of DNA findings in the legal arena. There exists a
pressing necessity for the establishment and execution of uniform
procedures for DNA analysis in Indian courts. Furthermore, it underscores
the significance of providing forensic personnel with adequate training to
guarantee precise and dependable analysis.

Historical Background:

Although forensic science as a means for administering the course of an

investigation is in its nascent stage, its roots have been traced to the ancient
civilisations of Rome and Greece. It is believed that Egyptian society, which
dates back to the early 3000 BC, performed the first autopsies on humans.
The surgeons removed and examined a person’s internal organs upon death
as part of their religious ritual. The earliest known autopsy was performed
in 44 BC by a Roman physician named Anstisius, who examined Julius
Caesar’s body and concluded that, despite having been stabbed 23 times, it
was merely one wound to the chest that had him slain.

Song Ci, who was a prominent Chinese physician, judge, forensic medical
scientist, and anthropologist, wrote the first recorded account of the use of
entomology (the study of insects) and medicine to investigate crimes in a
book titled Xi Yuan Lu, translated into English as “The Washing Away of the
Wrongs” or “Collective Cases of Injustice Rectified” around the thirteenth
century. It is one of the first works accessible to assist in resolving the cause
of death. By assessing the weapon used to cause death, the book delineated
how to distinguish an accidental death from a homicide. Likewise, the first
antecedent of the Polygraph test was the inspection of a suspect’s saliva,
mouth, and tongue to ascertain innocence or guilt. The suspect’s mouth was
filled with raw rice and rice powder in the ancient Indian and Chinese
societies, respectively, and then was instructed to spit it out. Also, in Middle
Eastern societies, the accused were directed to lick heated metal rods
momentarily. These techniques were predominantly based on the idea that
someone guilty of committing a crime would have less saliva produced. As a
result, individuals were deemed guilty if they had rice trapped in their
mouths or had severely burned tongues. In the ensuing centuries, forensic
science had a resurgence with an increase in the use of science to solve
crimes. Techniques like comparing footprints and clothes fibres from a
suspect to evidence started becoming widespread. Criminal investigations
1
began to emphasise logical, evidence-based methods.

1
Admin (2018) Exploring the History of Forensic Science through the ages, Incognito
Forensic Foundation Lab. Available at: https://ifflab.org/history-of-forensic-science/
(Accessed: 08 September 2023).
The legitimacy of coerced confessions and trust towards occult practices like
witchcraft soon began to dwindle in the eyes of the courts. Fingerprint
analysis eventually developed in 1880, and this advancement in
fingerprinting was regarded as a watershed moment in the domain of
forensic science.

An Austrian Jurist, Hans Gross, is credited with the application of scientific

methods to crime scenes, which led to the emergence of criminalistics as a
distinct field. He is known as the father of ‘criminal profiling.’ Building on
Gross’ work, Edmond Locard, a prominent criminologist, introduced the
Exchange Principle, which posits that any interaction between two objects
results in the exchange of materials. This principle implies that every
criminal contact leaves behind a trace. Frances Glessner Lee, widely
recognised as ‘the mother of forensic science,’ played a pivotal role in the
advancement of forensic science in the United States. Her notable
contribution includes the creation of the Nutshell Studies of Unexplained
Death, which are detailed crime scene models used for instructing
investigators.

The implementation of science and technology in the identification and

investigation of criminal activities, as well as the administration of justice,
has been a longstanding practice in India. Although our predecessors did
not possess knowledge of the contemporary form of forensic science,
scientific methods were employed in some capacity during the investigation
of crimes. A comprehensive account of this practice can be found in
Kautilya's 'Arthashastra', a text that dates back to approximately 2300 years
ago. The study of various patterns of papillary lines was performed by
Indians thousands of years ago, and it is supposed that they were aware of
the persistence and individuality of fingerprints, which they utilised as
signatures. Furthermore, Mr. KM Kata, a frequent contributor to 'Nature',
asserted that Chinese records provide evidence of the use of fingerprints in
an ancient kingdom located in the southern part of India. The Indians have
long been aware of the fact that handprints, known as 'Tarija', were unique
and could not be replicated. The use of fingerprints as signatures by
illiterate individuals in India, which was introduced centuries ago, was
initially regarded by some as a ceremonial practice until it was scientifically
proven that identification through fingerprints was infallible. 2

The proposal of utilising fingerprints as a means of personal identification

was initially put forth by Sir William Herschel, the District Magistrate of
Hooghly District in the Bengal province, in 1858. Subsequently, Dr. Henry
Faulds suggested the possibility of tracing a criminal through latent prints
discovered at the crime scene and concluded that no two fingerprints are
identical. Sir Edward Richard Henry, the then Inspector General of Police in
Lower Bengal, collaborated with two Indian officers, Khan Bahadur Azizul
Haque and Rai Bahadur Hemchandra Bose, to develop a fingerprint
classification system, thereby replacing the anthropometric identification
system.

The first-ever Finger Print Bureau in the world was established at the
Writer’s Building in Calcutta (now Kolkata) in 1897 and commenced its
operations in 1904. Since then, forensic science has been routinely
employed in crime investigations in India. Numerous State and Central
Forensic Science Laboratories have been established in India, and
Fingerprint Bureaus have been established in various states. Crime and
toxicological laboratories have been established under the police and health
departments, respectively.3 4

2
Tewari R K, Ravikumar K V. History and development of forensic science in India. J
Postgrad Med [serial online] 2000 [cited 2023 Sep 12];46:303. Available from:
https://www.jpgmonline.com/text.asp?2000/46/4/303/250

3
(2021) National Crime Records Bureau. Available at: https://ncrb.gov.in/en/central-finger-
print-bureau (Accessed: 12 September 2023).

4
Kathane, P. et al. (2021) The development, status and future of forensics in India, Forensic
Science International: Reports. Available at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665910721000463#bib1 (Accessed:
12 September 2023).
 Comparative Study: Forensic Evidence Around the World

Forensic science plays a pivotal role in equipping the investigating officer

with vital information through the collection of evidence on the scene and
the utilisation of scientific equipment. This information is instrumental in
aiding the court in determining the modus operandi of the crime, identifying
potential suspects, and ultimately solving the crime. Additionally, forensic
scientists endeavour to recreate the crime and ascertain the motive behind it
by answering all pertinent questions and engaging with the perpetrator. 5 The
comprehension of the criminal justice administration system is imperative in
determining the conclusion of a case, as the acceptability of forensic
evidence holds significant weight in this regard. The criminal justice system
parades significant variation across different countries, contingent upon its
historical background and the legal framework adopted by each jurisdiction.
Countries which were colonised by the British predominantly follow the
Common Law system. Meanwhile, most of the European countries follow the
Civil Law system. While Civil Law countries adhere to the Inquisitorial
system, Common Law countries pursue the Adversarial system.
Consequently, this section intends to investigate whether the applicability
and admissibility of forensic evidence undergo alteration based on the legal
system assumed by a given country. To determine the aforementioned
statement, this section would classify the process and validity of collection
and admissibility of forensic evidence in a few countries around the world.

1. United States
In the United States, forensic evidence is widely deemed as

5
Bishnoi, N. and Sharma, U.S. (2021) Forensic Science has a significant role in the criminal
justice system, Ignited Minds Journals. Available at: https://ignited.in/I/a/306005
(Accessed: 09 September 2023).
 a piece of reliable, consistent, and valid evidence. Numerous cases
have emerged where individuals wrongfully convicted were
subsequently exonerated based on forensic evidence. Nonetheless, a
concerning issue of forensic fraud is on the rise. As per the Innocence
Project, the erroneous application of forensic science has played a
massive role in over half of the wrongful conviction cases and nearly a
quarter of all such cases since 1989.6 The Innocence Project is a non-
profit organisation dedicated to releasing the innocent, averting
wrongful convictions, and establishing just and equitable justice
systems.7
The methods encompassed in forensic examination are:8
 Hair comparisons;
 Tool mark evidence;
 Arson investigation;
 Dog scent evidence;
 Comparative bullet lead analysis;
 Bloodstain pattern analysis.

In certain instances, forensic science examiners have been found to

present deceptive testimonies that magnify the correlation between
the evidence found at the crime scene and the individual under
investigation. Moreover, they have been known to misrepresent
exculpatory findings as inconclusive or minimise the constraints
associated with the forensic science techniques employed. Contrarily,
there have been occasions where these practitioners have erred while
conducting reliable forensic methods within a controlled laboratory
setting, falsified outcomes to strengthen the prosecution's argument
against a particular individual or concealed evidence that could
potentially exonerate the accused party.
6
Misapplication of Forensic Science - Innocence project (2023).
https://innocenceproject.org/misapplication-of-forensic-science/
7
Innocence Project (2023). https://innocenceproject.org/
8
Ibid.
 Frye v. United States9 is widely regarded as a significant legal case
that played a pivotal role in establishing the authority of forensic
science within the United States. The Columbian District Court, in
this particular case, dismissed the scientific credibility of the
polygraph test due to its lack of substantial acceptance within the
scientific community back then. The court ushered in the
admissibility of experimental examinations, acknowledging the
challenge of determining the point at which a scientific principle or
observation transitions from the experimental to the demonstrable
realm. The court emphasised that the evidential strength of a theory
must be acknowledged within this ambiguous zone, and while the
courts are inclined to accept observational evidence derived from a
well-established scientific principle, the object from which the
inference is derived must possess sufficient recognition within the
specific field of application.10 Essentially, the application of the 'Frye
Test' necessitated a court's assessment of whether a reasonable
proportion of the relevant scientific community generally endorsed
the disputed method, methodology, and concepts. This norm has
persisted for numerous years within federal courts.

The admissibility of forensic evidence has long been a subject of

contention within the courts of the United States. This dispute
revolves around the constitutional implications of evidence obtained
through illegal or unlawful methods. Specifically, it falls under the
purview of the 'fruits of a poisonous tree' doctrine, which requires the
Court to determine whether evidence collected in violation of an
individual's fundamental rights can be presented in a court of law.
Throughout history, the judiciary has predominantly adopted a
stance that does not exclude evidence solely based on its
procurement through illegal means. Instead, the court evaluates the

9
Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)
10
Weiss, K.J. (2014) Frye’s backstory: a tale of murder, a retracted confession, and scientific
hubris. https://jaapl.org/content/42/2/226.
 relevance and probative value of the evidence, with any irregularities
or improprieties in the collection process not automatically rendering
the evidence inadmissible.11

The principle of fruits of a poisonous tree is a doctrine commonly

found in Common Law jurisdictions. It pertains to the unlawful and
illegal collection of evidence by investigating agencies and the
admissibility of such evidence in court. The principle suggests that if
the foundation of the evidence is tainted, then anything derived from
it will also be flawed. In the United States, evidence obtained through
illegal means, such as search and seizure or investigation, is
unlawful.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled in the case
of Silverthorne Lumber Co. Inc. v. United States12 that the discovery of
a key to a post box during an illegal search, which subsequently led
to the finding of a vital document incriminating the defendant, would
not be admissible as evidence in court. This exclusion is founded on
the doctrine that such evidence is regarded as a product of an
unlawful search, commonly referred to as a poisonous tree.

The courts in India hold a distinct perspective on this matter. The

transient judicial policy of excluding unlawfully obtained evidence
did not last long, as the Court allowed the admission of such
evidence. In R. M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra,13 the police
affixed a tape-recording device to a telephone with the consent of
only one party to record the conversation. However, the opposing
party argued that the tape-recorded conversation had been acquired
11
Indulia, B. (2020) Rethinking the ‘Fruits of the poisonous tree’ doctrine: Should the ‘ends’
justify the ‘means’? | SCC Blog.
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/06/15/rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-
poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means/

12
Silverthorne Lumber Co., Inc. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920)

13
R. M. Malkani v. State Of Maharashtra, 1973 AIR 157
 through illegal methods. Against this backdrop, it was determined
that "even though if evidence is acquired illegally, it remains
admissible."

2. Japan
The evolution of forensic science in Japan was rapid after the
modernisation of legal systems and science in the latter half of the
19th century. Despite the emendation of legal systems under the new
Constitution after World War II, the form of crime and death
investigation systems remained essentially unaffected. It comprises
police forensic science institutions for criminal investigation and
university institutes of forensic or legal medicine and related
disciplines. The medical examiner system was established primarily
for noncriminal cases in several major cities after the war. The
current issues in unnatural death investigations in Japan can be
traced back to the past and are related to the physical examination of
human bodies, classification of deaths by non-medical police officials,
and lack of proper systems and institutions for investigating
unnatural deaths. Despite a significant budget for criminal
investigations by the police, these urgent issues need to be addressed
to improve the investigation of unnatural deaths in Japan.
In criminal cases in Japan, judges are obligated to assess all
presented evidence independently, without relying on expert
witnesses. It is according to the principle of 'free evaluation of
evidence,' which avoids rigid guidelines for determining the
persuasiveness of specific types of evidence.14 The adjudicating body
must carefully consider all relevant information before determining
the status of a particular fact. The prefectural police are responsible
for handling all criminal cases, including cybercrimes, while being
overseen by the National Police Agency.15
14
T 0474/04 (Declaration in lieu of an oath/ALTHIN MEDICAL) 30-06-2005 | Epo.org (no date).
https://www.epo.org/en/boards-of-appeal/decisions/t040474ex1.

15
科学技術振興機構国立研究開発法人 国立研究開発法人 科学技術振興機構. ARES 2009 (jst.go.jp)
 The death investigation system of Japan is a unique combination of
the Police-based death investigation system and the Medical
Examiner (ME) system, making it a hybrid model. However, the
availability of the ME system is presently confined to three major
cities in Japan, namely Tokyo, Kobe, and Osaka.16
In Japan, it is mandatory to report all unnatural deaths to the Police,
and forensic medicine departments are responsible for conducting
judicial autopsies. The medical examiner (ME) centres in Japan play a
crucial role in performing administrative or consent autopsies. 17 To
ensure that death investigations are carried out efficiently and
accurately, most forensic departments and ME centres in the country
18
have been equipped with CT scanners.
These scanners are used to perform detailed examinations of the body
to identify any potential injuries or causes of death. In addition,
police forensic laboratories located across the country are equipped
with advanced equipment and technology to conduct various ancillary
investigations that can help to shed light on the circumstances
surrounding a death.
In contrast to Japan and the USA, South Asian countries have
adopted an integrated service system that prioritises forensic
medicine education in medical training. As a result, medical
graduates from South Asian countries possess comprehensive skills
in all aspects of medicolegal work, including autopsies. On the other
hand, Japan and the USA follow divided service systems and require

16
Sawaguchi, T. and Knight, B., 2001. Legal Aspects of Medical Practice in Britain and
Japan. ARCHIV FUR KRIMINOLOGIE, 208(3/4), pp.127-127.

17
Fujimiya, T., 2009. Legal medicine and the death inquiry system in Japan: a comparative
study. Legal medicine, 11, pp.S6-S8.

18
Ibid.
 additional training for forensic pathologists or medical examiners to
obtain certification for performing autopsies. This is mainly due to the
advancements in forensic medicine within their respective nations. 19
20

3. Germany
Until March 1997, the collection of blood samples for genetic
fingerprinting or DNA analysis was not permissible in Germany.
Nonetheless, German Code of Criminal Procedure
(Strafprozeßordnung) authorised the collection of blood samples from
victims to aid in criminal investigations.21
The Strafprozeßordnung’s (StPO) S.81A was initially employed to
establish the blood alcohol levels of a suspect in traffic cases.
Additionally, it was utilised to determine the suspect’s capacity to
stand trial and to establish criminal responsibility at the time of the
crime.22 Upon reviewing S.81A of the StPO, it became apparent that
the provision does not specify the grounds for which blood may be
drawn. Subsequently, the collection of blood samples for genetic
fingerprinting was deemed lawful by the police department.
Despite the Federal Supreme Court and Federal Constitutional Court
recognising S.81A as the appropriate legal basis for the collection of
blood samples for DNA analysis in criminal cases, legal and
constitutional questions were raised by various industries. To address
19
Zangpo D, Iino M, Nakatome M, Yoshimiya M, Norbu N. Forensic Medicine in South Asia:
Comparison to the Developed Countries. Yonago Acta Med. 2022 Aug 1;65(3):191-199. doi:
10.33160/yam.2022.08.006. PMID: 36061572; PMCID: PMC9419216.

20
Zangpo, D. et al. (2022) 'Forensic medicine in South Asia: comparison to the developed
countries,' Yonago Acta Medica, 65(3), pp. 191–199.
https://doi.org/10.33160/yam.2022.08.006.

21
Dey, R. (1BC) Law of Forensic Evidence in India and Abroad: A Comparative Study.
https://doi.org/10.1732/IJLMH.26627.

22
Ibid.
 these concerns, a draft amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure
was presented on March 2, 1995. The German Social Democratic
Parliamentary Group (SPD) subsequently proposed a draft code,
which was adopted in December 1996, based on previous drafts by
the Federal Ministry of Justice and the SPD. Nevertheless, the code
was vetoed since it did not explicitly preclude the establishment of
gene databanks. Finally, in March 1997, the Parliamentary Act
amending the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Administrative
Offenses Act came into effect. Before March 1997, it was illegal to
collect blood samples for genetic fingerprinting or DNA analysis in
Germany. However, the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) allowed
the collection of blood samples from a victim for a criminal
investigation. Initially, S.81A of the StPO was used to determine the
accused’s blood alcohol content in cases of traffic offences, and in
some cases, to determine the suspect’s ability to stand trial or
criminal guilt at the time of the crime. The review of S.81A of the
StPO revealed that the reason for which blood may be drawn is not
defined, making it acceptable to collect blood samples for genetic
fingerprints within the police population. Nevertheless, different
industries raised constitutional and criminal law questions, despite
the Federal Supreme Court and Federal Constitutional Court
recognising S.81a as the appropriate legal basis for the collection of
blood samples for DNA review in criminal cases. To address these
concerns, a draft amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure was
proposed on March 2, 1995.
The courts in Germany are mandated to appoint an expert who has
been authorised by a state agency of public law. This agency is
known as the 'Kammern' in Germany. This regulation ensures that a
qualified specialist is chosen in a specific field and eliminates any
potential difficulties in the selection process. 23 However, there may be
situations where the court may choose experts who are not registered

23
Section 73 stop
 with the Kammern, the entity responsible for maintaining a registry of
selected experts. It is worth noting that expert registrations in
Germany are not exclusively associated with criminal proceedings. 24
The admissibility of expert testimony in Germany is determined based
on the expertise in the relevant subject field. In Germany, the
principles of free assessment of proof govern evidentiary prosecutions,
with the court having complete jurisdiction over the admission and
evaluation of evidence, subject to a few constitutional exceptions.
Judges in Germany actively participate in the collection of testimony,
and their decision on the admissibility of evidence is final. Expert
opinions are typically submitted to the court in written form, but, if
necessary, the court may summon the expert for a hearing to further
investigate specific aspects of their opinion.25
In the case of Jalloh v. Germany26, the court conducted extensive
deliberations regarding the enforceability of coercive acquisition of
bodily evidence. Specifically, the matter at hand involved the
ingestion of medication-induced emesis to retrieve evidence from the
suspect's stomach, which was ordered by the competent public
prosecutor after the suspect's apprehension. However, as the suspect
declined to voluntarily consume the medication, it was forcibly
administered. The court reaffirmed that for ill-treatment to fall within
the purview of Art.3, it must reach a minimum threshold of severity,
which is subjective and contingent upon various factors such as the
treatment's duration, its physical and psychological implications,
and, in some cases, the victim's gender, age, and health condition.
The manner in which the impugned measure was executed had the
potential to be degrading and demeaning for the suspect, and it posed
risks to their well-being. The measure was implemented in a way that
24
Section 244 stop

25
Ibid.

26
Jalloh v. Germany, Application no. 54810/00
 inflicted physical anguish and mental distress upon the suspect.
Consequently, the court determined that there had been a violation of
Art.3. It is important to note that the court's ruling is grounded in the
principles of human rights and underscores the importance of
respecting the dignity and integrity of individuals when obtaining
evidence.

4. United Kingdom
The United Kingdom's former standing as a global leader in forensic
science has been called into question by a recent House of Lords
report.27 The counterparts have emphasised significant flaws in the
UK's approach to forensics, adding to a series of reports that have
exposed a growing crisis in the country's utilisation of scientific
methods for law enforcement and criminal justice. The report,
compiled by the Lords' Science and Technology Committee,
incorporates input from academicians, police personnel, and private
forensic scientists. It underscores the wide range of techniques
encompassed by forensic science, including the analysis of mobile
phone and computer records, as well as DNA analysis, and
emphasises their crucial role in criminal cases. The report identifies
shortcomings in both the supply of forensic services and the
government's and legal system's handling of the matter. Notably,
approximately 20 per cent of forensic science is outsourced to private
providers, with just three companies dominating the marketplace. It
is worth noting that one of these companies came perilously close to
collapse last year.28

27
The editorial board (2019) 'The UK needs to change its approach to forensics,' Financial
Times, 1 May. https://www.ft.com/content/8cb3285c-6b49-11e9-80c7-60ee53e6681d.

28
Burton, L. (2021, April 23). Forensic science and the criminal justice system - House of
Lords Library. House of Lords Library. https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/forensic-science-
and-the-criminal-justice-system/
 Instances of wrongful conviction continue to exist within the
jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. Such cases have surfaced as a
result of errors in evidence collection or inadequate examination of
the same.
One example of a wrongful conviction resulting from a forensic error
involved Adam Scott, an innocent man who was falsely charged with
rape due to a mistake at Britain's largest private forensic science
testing centre. Despite being hundreds of miles away from the crime
scene, Adam Scott was arrested and held in custody. The DNA tests
conducted by a private firm incorrectly linked Adam Scott's DNA from
Devon to the rape allegation made by a woman in Manchester. 29
On October 23, 2011, Mr Scott was accused based on the DNA test
results that supposedly connected him to the crime. However, it was
not until March 2012 that the charges were finally dropped. It was
discovered that a plastic tray containing a sample of his DNA had
been reused during the analysis of a swab from the rape victim.
Several weeks later, investigators became suspicious when they found
evidence in Mr Scott's phone records suggesting that he had been in
Plymouth shortly after the alleged attack, casting doubt on the test
results. According to the Forensic Science Regulator, Andrew
Rennison, Mr Scott was an innocent victim of avoidable
contamination.30 In his report on the matter, Mr Rennison stated that
the contamination ensued due to human error, as a technician did
not observe basic procedures for disposing of plastic trays used in the
validated DNA extraction process. This case once again raised

29
GeppSolicitors (2023b) Man charged with rape on inaccurate DNA evidence.
https://geppsolicitors.co.uk/site/blog/criminal-law-news/man-charged-with-rape-on-
inaccurate-dna-evidence/.

30
Ibid.
 concerns about the closure of the Forensic Science Service, which
had previously provided forensic services to the police.31

Forensic Justice in the Indian Context

In India, according to Art.13 of the Constitution of India, the laws passed by
the Parliament must adhere to the provisions of the Constitution. These
laws should not violate the fundamental rights of Indian citizens, which are
protected under Part III of the Constitution. In India, NARCO Analysis is a
research technique used to gather scientific evidence for a specific case.
However, it is typically used to supplement existing evidence and cannot be
considered as the sole conclusive evidence. This practice is seen as a
violation of the accused's fundamental rights, as it forces them to testify
against themselves. Art.20(3) of the Constitution explicitly states that an
individual cannot be compelled to be a witness against themselves. The
Supreme Court of India, in the case of Selvi and Ors. v. The State of
Karnataka32 has recognized that Art.20(3) also protects individuals during
the investigative phase of criminal cases. When combined with S.161(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it safeguards the rights of accused
persons, suspects, and witnesses who are examined during an investigation.
Test results obtained through coercion cannot be considered as evidence.
Art.20(3) guarantees an individual's right to choose between speaking and
remaining silent, regardless of whether their subsequent testimony proves to be incriminating
or exonerating.
The production of evidence before a court serves the important purpose of
proving or disproving a fact, as stipulated under Section 3 of the Indian
Evidence Act. The objective is to establish fact in an issue or a relevant fact
beyond a reasonable doubt, thereby condemning the accused without any

31
Forensic Science Regulator [Mr. Andrew Rennison MSc ] (17AD) Report into the
Circumstances of a Complaint Received from the Greater Manchester Police on 7 March 2012
Regarding DNA Evidence Provided by LGC Forensics.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b470f40f0b66eab9a02b7/dna-contam-
report.pdf (Accessed: October 20, 2023).

32
Selvi and Ors. v. The State of Karnataka, (2010) 7 SCC 263
benefit of the doubt. The term proving refers to the process of verifying the
truth or falsehood of a material fact, enabling individuals to determine the
accuracy of the subject matter. Our perception of the material or proposition
presented to us is influenced by our beliefs, which may be based on facts or
statements made by individuals related to the case.
The law of evidence categorises evidence into two distinct types, namely
circumstantial evidence and corroborative evidence. The former refers to
evidence that is indirect and requires inference to establish a fact, while the
latter pertains to evidence that supports or confirms a fact already
established by other evidence. This bifurcation is crucial in determining the
admissibility and weight of evidence in legal proceedings. The distinction
between circumstantial and corroborative evidence is essential in ensuring
that only reliable and relevant evidence is presented in court, thereby
promoting the fairness and integrity of the legal system.
The Indian Evidence Act incorporates circumstantial evidence into the
category of 'relevant facts.' The relevant facts must be supported by direct
evidence, which can be either in the form of oral or documentary evidence.
Forensic evidence has been classified as circumstantial evidence due to its
potential to provide crucial investigative leads. This classification is based
on the fact that forensic evidence is not direct evidence, but rather evidence
that is inferred from other facts. Therefore, it is important to carefully
evaluate the reliability and relevance of forensic evidence to ensure that it is
used appropriately in legal proceedings. It is imperative to comprehend that
when an individual with expertise provides their opinion in a legal
proceeding, it must be subjected to rigorous examination before it can be
utilised as evidence. In India, this process is governed by Section 45 of the
Evidence Act of 1872 which deals with the admissibility of an expert
opinion. However, it is equally important to scrutinise the opinion of the
expert under Articles 21 and 20(3) of the Constitution of India, which
safeguard the accused's rights to life and personal liberty, as well as their
right against self-incrimination. Additionally, consideration must be given to
Section 161(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Furthermore, in the
context of DNA profiling, there are significant advantages for convicted
individuals provided by Sections 53 and 53A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The use of 'fingerprints' is safeguarded by the Identification of
Prisoners Act, 1920, Section 73 of the Evidence Act, and Section 293 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure in conjunction with other laws governing
forensic techniques.
In the legal system, the judge plays a crucial role in ensuring that a fair and
just verdict is reached during a court trial. This involves a thorough and
meticulous analysis of all relevant information that pertains to the case at
hand. In general, individuals who do not have any direct involvement in the
case are not called upon to testify or give their opinions during criminal
trials, as this complies with established legal principles. However,
professionals with specialised knowledge and expertise in specific fields may
be summoned to provide their expert opinions, as they can offer valuable
insights on relevant issues, even if they are not intimately familiar with the
specific details of the case. The judiciary faces difficulties in evaluating
complex expert evidence related to science or technology. Expert opinion
testimony has become prevalent in the criminal justice system within a
relatively short time. Scholars have been debating for the past thirty years
about who should evaluate scientific evidence - judges or the scientific
community. If the scientific community is solely responsible, it could affect
the traditional role of judges in determining the truth. However, judges
cannot be expected to act as amateur scientists. In criminal jurisprudence,
trial courts are responsible for not only determining the relevance of expert
evidence but also assessing its reliability as 'gatekeepers' founded on
33
standards of admissibility.
In India, there has been a disturbing trend of police investigations in
criminal cases being compromised by evidence tampering and negligent
officers. This has resulted in investigations being derailed due to improper
crime scene checks. The case of Rahul v. State of Delhi Ministry of Home

33
Chauhan, K. (2023) Admissibility and Evidentiary Value of Scientific Evidence:
Legislative and Judicial Approach in India, International Journal for Research Trends and
Innovation. Available at: https://www.ijrti.org/papers/IJRTI2301024.pdf (Accessed: 10
September 2023).
Affairs34 is a recent example of a failed investigation and laxity due to police
officers' actions. To prevent such delays and obstacles in the justice system,
India needs to improve its investigation methods and rely more on medical
and scientific evidence provided by experts in the field. The Apex Court has
provided extensive guidelines on when scientific evidence can be accepted as
reliable evidence in complex criminal cases. Lower courts should follow
these guidelines and accept scientific evidence as a more trustworthy and
recurring piece of evidence. This will speed up the delivery of justice, reduce
the burden on police officers, and eliminate ambiguity from traditionally
presented evidence. The field of Forensic Science is widely recognised for its
significant contribution to DNA testing. This particular aspect plays a
crucial role in many criminal investigations. Despite the absence of a
specific law relating to DNA testing in the Constitution, the Code of Criminal
Procedure, specifically S.53 and 54, provides a clear guideline for the
examination process of suspected individuals by a certified medical
practitioner. The examination is based on reasonable grounds of inquiry,
ensuring a fair and just investigation.
According to S.53 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, a medical
practitioner may examine an accused person at the request of a police
officer if there are reasonable grounds to believe that it will yield evidence
related to the offence. Furthermore, S.54 allows for an arrested person to be
examined by a registered medical practitioner upon their request. The Law
Commission of India's 37th report recommends that an arrested person may
be examined by a medical practitioner if there are reasonable grounds to
believe that it will provide evidence related to the offence, to facilitate
effective investigation.
The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 is a recent legislative
measure that has been enacted to address the identification of the accused
and the evidentiary requirements on such identification in criminal
proceedings. The implementation of the Criminal Procedure (Identification)
Act of 2022 offers a crucial means of accurately measuring and identifying

34
Rahul v. State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs (CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 612-613 OF
2022).
convicted individuals, as well as those under investigation for criminal
activities. Furthermore, this act ensures the meticulous preservation of all
records about such matters. The benefits of this act are manifold, as it not
only aids in the identification of those engaged in criminal activity but also
greatly assists investigators in solving cases.35
S.3 of the Act confers authority upon an officer of no lesser rank than that of
a head constable to conduct measurements of the accused in a manner
prescribed by either the Central or State Government. The term
'measurements,' as defined in S.2(b), encompasses a range of activities,
including the collection of finger impressions, palm-print impressions, foot-
print impressions, photographs, iris and retina scans, physical and
biological samples, and their subsequent analysis, as well as the assessment
of behavioural attributes such as signatures, handwriting, or any other
examination that is referenced in either S.53 or S.53A of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. It is essential to mention that Section 4 of the Act
confers the authority to gather, preserve, and safeguard data, which
includes the acquisition, retention, sharing, deletion, and destruction of
records.
The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has been designated as the
primary agency responsible for maintaining records, which will be shared
with law enforcement agencies. Following this mandate, States/Union
Territories (UTs) may designate agencies to collect, preserve, and share data
within their respective jurisdictions. The data collected will be stored in
digital or electronic format for a period of 75 years. In instances where
individuals are acquitted after all appeals or released without trial, records
will be destroyed. However, in such cases, a Court or Magistrate may direct
the retention of details after recording reasons in writing.

Conclusion
The role of forensic science in the global legal system is undeniably vital.
Governments worldwide are actively working to establish a strong

35
Preamble of the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022
foundation for forensic evidence and are updating laws to align with
advancements in techniques. The proposed legislation aims to improve trial
proceedings to ensure justice characterised by fairness, reasonableness, and
justness. It is important to acknowledge the significance of forensic science
in providing crucial evidence that can be used to solve crimes and bring
perpetrators to justice. This study delves into the comparison of forensic
jurisprudence across different nations, with a particular focus on the
progress made in India. However, it is important to note that it does not
address the issue of pending cases or delve into the matter of cold cases that
remain unresolved, such as the Aarushi Talwar murder case. The omission
of these critical aspects limits the scope and comprehensiveness of this
issue. Therefore, it is imperative to continue efforts to strengthen forensic
science to ensure the effective functioning of the legal system, thereby
guaranteeing a fair and just trial for all.

References
1) Saferstein, R. (2004). Forensic science: An introduction. Pearson
Education.
2) Caddy, B. (2012). The role of forensic science in criminal
investigations. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44(2), 119-
130.
3) Koehler, J. J. (2008). The base rate fallacy reconsidered: Descriptive,
normative, and methodological challenges. Behavioral Sciences & the
Law, 26(2), 173-190.
4) Gunn, J., & Evans, R. (2008). Forensic justice: A manifesto for the
twenty-first century. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 47(4),
421-436.
5) Smith, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). Ethics and integrity in forensic
investigations. Journal of Forensic Science, 45(2), 123-145.
6) Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations,
confessions, and testimony. John Wiley & Sons.
 7) Garrett, B. L. (2011). Convicting the innocent: Where criminal
prosecutions go wrong. Harvard University Press.
8) Chaudhary, A., & Chaudhary, S. (2017). Role of Forensic Science in
Criminal Justice System: A Critical Analysis. International Journal of
Advanced Research, 5(7), 2017-2021.
9) Kaur, R., & Kaur, R. (2017). Forensic Science in India: A Review.
International Journal of Scientific Research, 6(2), 1-3.
10) Kaur, R., & Sharma, A. (2017). Forensic Science in India: A Review.
International Journal of Current Research and Modern Education,
2(1), 1-6.
11) Kumar, A., & Sharma, A. (2017). Forensic Science in India: Current
Scenario and Future Perspectives. International Journal of Forensic
Science & Pathology, 5(2), 1-7.
12) Sarkar, A., & Chakraborty, S. (2016). Challenges in DNA analysis in
Indian courts. Journal of Forensic Science & Criminology, 4(1), 1-8.
13) Zangpo, D. et al. (2022) 'Forensic medicine in South Asia: comparison
to the developed countries,' Yonago Acta Medica, 65(3), pp. 191–199.
14) Dey, R. (1BC) Law of Forensic Evidence in India and Abroad: A
Comparative Study.
15) Chauhan, K. (2023) Admissibility and Evidentiary Value of Scientific
Evidence: Legislative and Judicial Approach in India, International
Journal for Research Trends and Innovation.
16) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
17) Indian Evidence Act, 1872
18) Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022
19) German Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozeßordnung)