Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language,

Online ISSN 2348-3083, SJ IMPACT FACTOR 2021: 7.278,

http://www.srjis.com/issues_data?issueId=211
PEER REVIEWED & REFEREED JOURNAL, APRIL-MAY 2023, VOL-11/57
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8141488

IMPROVING FORENSIC SCIENCE RELIABILITY IN INDIAN CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar

Ph.D. Research Scholar at Law department of Dr. Balasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada
university Aurangabad

Paper Received On 20 May 2023

Peer Reviewed On 28 May 2023
Published On: 1 June 2023

Abstract

We are reaching a fundamental turning point in the forensic sciences. The successful use of forensic
scientific techniques in the criminal justice system has been questioned and essentially considered in
light of several high-profile discoveries and an expanding body of literature. We make the case for the
requirement of a stronger relationship and identify key issues that demand consideration from experts
working in both the forensic science and legal fields. Forensic science is used by the legal system to
settle individual criminal cases as well as by law enforcement to reduce crime and get convictions.
Previous studies in this field have concentrated more on science and innovation than on how people
may use forensic services and science to their best advantage to achieve just results. As part of this five-
year project, the viability of forensic science in police investigations and court preliminary hearings
will be examined.
Keywords: Improving, Forensic Science, Reliability, Indian, Criminal Justice, System
Scholarly Research Journal's is licensed Based on a work at www.srjis.com

Introduction
The quick development of new logical strategies, particularly the increased knowledge
regarding the forensic use of deoxyribonucleic acid, has already had and probably will continue
to have an almost unanticipated effect on our criminal justice system. This is especially true
when things are just getting started. These new logical methods have been applied in forensic
investigations most commonly in the criminal preliminary court. Despite the fact that some
sciences, such as fingerprinting and blood composition, have been used in criminal indictments
for some time, the past 20 years have seen the development of many new types of forensic
science criminal evidence, including the now-ubiquitous use of DNA, hair and fiber analysis,
new techniques for device imprint and ballistics analysis, warm imaging, and the obviously
logical examination of indentations or penmanship, among many others. Unquestionably, these

Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 266

new types of proof provide difficulties for preliminary adjudicators. Today, gathering and using
forensic evidence is a crucial part of both criminal investigations and arraignments.
By adopting logical techniques that are outside the scope of the designated authorities, forensic
science unquestionably contributes significantly to helping the legal system resolve
complicated criminal cases. The fundamental rule of criminal law is that the court must
carefully analyze all evidence before admitting it at a preliminary hearing and decide the
grounds for doing so. In criminal investigations and preliminary hearings, the possibility of
logical evidence is undeniable, but the role of the legal partners and their skill in vetting the
evidence is usually a contested topic in India as well as everywhere else in the globe. The main
goal of this delicate article is to frame the questions considered by the preliminary appointed
authorities when evaluating the logical arguments and theories mentioned, which must be
consistent with the general standards of acknowledgement used by mainstream researchers as
a condition precedent to accepting the forensic evidence.
However, more research is anticipated to determine the precise role of forensic evidence in
determining the pace of an arrest and exoneration. The presentation of forensic scientific
innovation has resulted in emotional mechanical advancements in the dynamic cycle in
criminal preliminary proceedings. In this way, as forensic evidence is mentioned during the
active phase of criminal proceedings, the opinions of various independent courts have been
examined. The traditional observer-based criminal justice system's technique has shown to be
very challenging for effective criminal arraignment. The criminal justice system is tainted by
this kind of criminal indictment. As a result of witnesses failing to appear on the dates set by
the courts or likely refusing to depend on the course of the court, which delays justice, judges
are no longer able to decide a criminal case or verify a fact in question solely based on the
testimony of potentially lying or dishonest witnesses. Additionally, after questioning the in-
boss and reviewing the evidence, the designated authorities are unable to make a definitive
judgment about the incident. These days, witnesses avoid testifying in court despite accepting
or having seen the evidence because of a psychotic fear of becoming victim to attacks or
suspects, which can be fatal.
Typically, crimes are performed in a way that makes it difficult to find a single observer. The
dynamic cycle in forensic cases is frequently entirely based on circumstantial evidence, such
as DNA evidence, ballistic expert reports, fingerprints, or synthetic examination results. Due
to a lack of conviction or sufficient proof, a number of startling suspects are either sentenced
or let off the hook based on even the slightest uncertainty. Additionally, the indictment spends
a lot of money on criminal court proceedings. As a result, the majority of open assets are
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 267

forfeited at usual arraignments, and suspects are freed on the basis that they have a chance to
prove their innocence. In fact, there are wrongdoings being committed right now, and logical
violations have surfaced that need to be resolved by forensic innovation. Digital forensics, for
instance, should be used to handle a digital case. Additionally, the classification of offenses
has changed from general to specific. Regular offenses are frequently committed logically
using PCs, in which case the major alternative is digital forensics.
Even if examiners are not yet ready to rely on the well-established specialty of examination,
source development, and observation to distinguish wrongdoing, wise criminals have begun
incorporating science into their illegal activities. Consequently, forensic science and cutting-
edge advances are essential to the functioning of the criminal justice system. The advancements
in forensic science have provided law enforcement and the judiciary a vital tool. With the use
of forensic evidence, a successful and accurate analysis of the wrongdoing and the court system
determines the criminal proof of a charged. From one end of the world to the other, forensic
science has been used to resolve rational cases, and it may help police investigators conduct
excellent investigations. Criminal investigation forms a significant part of the foundation of a
criminal indictment. In light of witness testimony, logical investigation using forensic science
is substantially more convincing, accurate, and fruitful than the criminal court system. A
culpable party cannot be excused because of a witness. However, there is no specific regulation
on the admissibility of forensic evidence in court (with the exception of the Indian Proof
Demonstration, which manages master proof), therefore we normally rely on the rulings and
decisions of the higher courts or the Zenith Court.
1. Literature Review
In order to ensure the validity and dependability of forensic science evidence in the Indian
criminal justice system, Das and Chattopadhyay (2021) oversaw a review. They examined
current procedures and challenges faced by forensic science professionals and made
recommendations for improving the validity of forensic evidence. The assessment emphasized
the value of standardized practices, quality assurance mechanisms, and ongoing project
preparations to work on the validity and reliability of forensic science proof in India.
Singh and Shukla (2019) looked into the challenges and possible solutions for enhancing the
dependability of forensic science in the Indian criminal justice system. Their review identified
various factors that affect the validity of forensic evidence, such as a lack of a framework,
outmoded technology, and constrained quality control methods. To solve these issues and boost
reliability, the designers suggested techniques like increased funding, upgrading of forensic
labs, and the establishment of certification systems.
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 268

In order to increase the credibility of forensic science in the Indian criminal justice system, Puri
and Mathur (2018) carried out a detailed examination of recent developments. The writers
discussed forensic techniques, mechanical redesigns, and institutional structural changes. Their
conclusions included the need for increasing interest in creative work, acceptance of
internationally controlled procedures, and enhanced cooperation between forensic scientific
organizations and law enforcement to assure the legitimacy of forensic science evidence.
Patil and Sharma (2017) carefully investigated the reliability of forensic science evidence in
the Indian criminal justice system. They investigated master statements, contextual studies, and
the precision and dependability of forensic methods. The assessment found problems with the
usage of out-of-date equipment, inadequate planning, and a lack of defined processes. The
authors stressed the significance of frequent capability testing, advanced project development,
and adherence to quality assurance principles to strengthen the validity of forensic evidence.
Desai and Kumar (2016) used a contextual analysis technique to look into ways to increase the
dependability of forensic science in the Indian criminal justice system. They examined specific
instances where forensic evidence played a crucial role and identified the challenges
encountered during exams and preliminary procedures. To increase the dependability of
forensic scientific evidence, the creators put up suggestions including strengthening the
forensic framework, ensuring the clarity and independence of the forensic foundations, and
elevating multidisciplinary collaboration.
2. Forensic Science
The application of science to the common and criminal laws that are executed by police
agencies in a criminal justice system is known as forensic science. However, in Bangladesh,
common regulations are not approved by the police. The Latin word "forensic," which means
"of or before the discussion," is where the English word "forensic" originates. A criminal
charge in ancient Rome implied bringing the subject up for discussion in front of a crowd of
people. 4 Both the person accused of the wrongdoing and the informant would speak in order
to present their respective points of view. The winner of the case would be determined by
whoever had the strongest argument and presentation. The term "forensic" is now used
interchangeably with the words "legal" or "related to courts." Forensic science can be referred
to as "legitimate science" in several ways. The logical method for examining social behavior
and historical facts is forensic science. This is especially important when it comes to police and
forensics that are completed in accordance with criminal or common law. Every branch of
science, including physical science, life structures, physiology, medicine, medical procedure,
physical science, and plant science, lends its expertise as needed. At times, this diversity of
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 269

branches of science is expected to enable an official courtroom to reach a just conclusion on a

contentious issue affecting life or property. In general, forensics is involved with identifying,
distinguishing, personalizing, and evaluating actual evidence employing techniques from
innate sciences in contexts of legal import. The result of forensic science is forensic proof. For
the most part, the term "forensic proof" refers to evidence that was obtained through rational
means or with the aid of innovation, such as ballistics, blood collection, or DNA fingerprinting,
and was then used in court. It is possible to link infractions that are thought to be related to one
another using forensic evidence.
3. Case Study
The Supreme Court defined the word "expert" in Mahmood v. State of U.P., where it was noted
that convicting someone based entirely on the testimony of an expert would be exceedingly
risky. Although using expert testimony as the basis for a prosecution is dangerous, Sections 53
and 53A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, mandate its use in certain situations. In Selvi
v. State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court determined that using forensic procedures like
polygraphy without the accused's consent violates Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Indian
Constitution and is thus unconstitutional.
5. The Role of Forensic Science in Criminal Justice
In the debates that came before, we saw a few issues and conundrums in the area of forensic
logic that have an impact on the reliability of the evidence. We should now change the subject
of our conversation to a genuine issue. In criminal situations, the examiners (as the
arraignment's proof) and protection (as the guard proof) carry the forensic logical proof into
the genuine area. Before it transitions into the degree of confirmation, several partners will deal
with it once it enters the observer box. In this section, dialogues are organized to make it easier
to understand the issues at hand. Various partners are requested, and it is through them that the
logical proof becomes evidence. In every single criminal case, the examiner will open the case
if there is any question. He weighs more than the guard does. In contrast to private events, the
examiner is appearing for the state even though he has no guardian relationship with it. He can
very easily tell his enemy by his profession. In addition to protecting the innocent from false
convictions and preventing serious premature delivery of justice, the examiner's duty is to find
the real guilty party guilty. In light of the primary areas where law and order is strongest, this
is a requirement for strengthening the criminal justice system. Unfortunately, it is evident at
arraignments in India that most investigators rush to determine the accused's guilt, whether or
not he really committed the crime. To be quite honest, this is more heart-breaking than
obnoxious.
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 270

The forensic logical evidence should be examined by the investigator first. Forensic
investigators may have biased, illogical reports that are inappropriately knitted together inside
the while coat. To preserve the public's faith in the system, it is the investigator's duty to locate
the trap. He needs to perform his research before submitting the report to the formal courts. It
is somewhat astonishing to remark that in India, the examiners neither require nor put much
thought into the report's language or its use of rules. How few controllers thoroughly teach
their logical observers to exclude some crucial needs from the report is the most hilariously
amazing preoccupation. The excellent examiners are well aware that the safeguard will benefit
from uncertainty if any regulations interfere with the pack of evidence.

4. Issues on Admissibility of Forensic Scientific Evidence in Criminal Trial

The relationship between law and science cannot be avoided, and this is especially true in
criminal instances where forensic evidence from the scene of the crime must be analyzed.
Science has continually been enlisted by regulation, and this has been growing little by little.
Forensic logical evidence has received serious criticism during the last thirty years. Because of
some moral concerns within the forensic logical field, serious reactions were evened out against
the validity of several tests in forensic identifiable proof. System or control concerns, exactness
issues, trustworthiness issues, and legal advisor skills issues are all thoroughly categorized as
the challenges that logical proof in criminal trials must overcome. The preliminary designated
authority must overcome certain additional challenges when evaluating forensic logical
evidence, such as the possibility that the chief observer may be biased or conflicted.

The legal executive faces a difficult task when evaluating the various pieces of evidence that
have an impact on either science or innovation. Within a constrained amount of time, the logical
master declaration overflowed into the criminal preliminary system. In actuality, the appointed
authorities lack knowledge of the standards that must be upheld for the proper evaluation of
the logical evidence that comes before the formal courts. Practically all advances in science
and innovation directly impact the preliminary step of the criminal case's reality vetting
procedure. Who will evaluate the extremely advanced logical proof—the adjudicator or
established researchers—has been a real problem for legal researchers for more than thirty
years. If the position were exclusively reserved for seasoned researchers, it would directly
affect the adjudicators' traditional task of locating the truth. The appointed authorities are not
expected to act as inexperienced researchers at the same time. While evaluating logical master
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 271

proof to accept something similar during preliminary, there should be consistency among the
selected authorities. The preliminary adjudicators are responsible for not only determining the
relevance of the evidence put forth by an expert but also for determining its credibility by taking
on the role of true "guardians" in light of the acceptability requirements. It is pitiful to observe
that, unlike other purviews, there is no set criteria in India for evaluating logical evidence in
criminal trials that has been established by regulation or High Court guidelines.
6. Indian Forensic Scientific Evidence: Factors Affecting Reliability
Despite the fact that forensic science is recognized as a trustworthy area in India, there are
additional important criteria in addition to those already covered that affect the validity of the
procedure's application in a given instance. The synopsis contains
1. a lack of empirical evidence
2. a dearth of research;
3. a neglect of the field of forensic science
4. Lack of a clearly established code of conduct
5. Lack of technical staff certification
6. Absence of a national identifying evidence database
7. The absence of statistics on the mistake rate for all techniques, etc.
The lack of logical certainty in forensic science is a problem that is prevalent not only in India
but also around the world. There isn't quite as much logical proof or conviction in forensic
science as there is in other logical areas. The important reason is a direct outcome of its close
connection to law because, in legitimate truth, which is seen as not quite the same as logical,
law doesn't anticipate any certainty but rather the verification based on probability. Public
wrongdoing research facilities are not safe havens for scientists, as Craig rightly put it. The
general public cannot rely as much on these labs as it may on other exploration labs because in
research labs, researchers use outdated, degraded, fragmented, mutilated, obfuscated, and
defiled instances to conduct their investigations. Essentially, all forensic ID tests rely on the
analyst's emotional evaluation, which is based on the subject's most recent understanding by
an independent person, in the context of test matching. Due to human intervention, there is a
chance that the two examples' matching of certain properties will be incorrect.
The lack of investigation, as well as the absence of companion reviewed articles and approved
studies, are severe problems that have an impact on trustworthiness. In addition, rather than
being used as a result of a valid logical analysis, the majority of forensic processes are used in
official courtrooms where they have been successfully applied for years. The best model is the

Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 272

unique mark approach, which lacks a sound logical foundation but is regarded as reliable by
legal authorities because to its long history.
The Public Exploration Gathering of the Public Foundations, US, published a report titled
"Reinforcing Forensic Science in the US: A Way Ahead" that contains precise, noteworthy
recommendations for enhancing the accuracy, dependability, and legitimacy of the forensic
scientific disciplines. The suggestions are:
The following peer-reviewed research fields should get considerable funding from the Public
Institution of Forensic Science:
a studies that present the justifications for the reliability of forensic methods.
b. Real-world, practical case studies that were identified in the course of a delegate test of
forensic sciences and research facilities should be reflected in the construction and foundation
of quantitative percentages of the dependability and correctness of forensic procedures.
Considering the various forensic proof states, concentrates should also describe the limitations
of accuracy and precision that scientific procedures may be anticipated to attain. A reputable
logical journal should publish the analysis used to calculate dependability and exactness ratios
once it has undergone peer review.
c. A rise in the quantitative susceptibility proportions in forensic investigation findings.
d. Robotized methods that can advance forensic research.
In addition to the aforementioned issues, when compared to other logical subjects, forensic
science is usually considered as an overlooked field. Since its beginnings, the great majority of
countries have neglected it as a part of their systems for enforcing laws and providing justice.
This was used as a justification by the government for not providing study funds.
Specialist tendency, compensation, and partisanship are rising as a result of the lack of a
particular set of principles and their correct implementation. Professionals who offer services
for the protection should be subject to limitations set by the state. Strict convention should be
applied to all forensic procedures in order to overcome tendency. India must develop a set of
governing rules and a legal framework for enforcing them, much like other nations. A public
code of behavior for all forensic science training has been suggested by the Public Foundation
of Forensic Science (NIFS) in the United States, and different social orders have been asked to
include this public code as a part of their professional set of principles. It also highlights the
requirement for a legal instrument to enforce the code for individuals who commit serious
moral offenses.
The other exam worth mentioning is the quality assurance in forensic aid. The kind of evidence
is influenced by a variety of variables, such as the approval of a plan, instrument quality control,
Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 273

participant count, accepted procedure, the license of the investigative laboratory, and
researcher confirmation. The quality and, hence, the validity of experimental results will be
impacted if there is a sizable difference in any of these parameters. Additionally, the overall
quality may be tested using capability tests. The capability tests are helpful for determining a
person's intellectual capacity and investigative skills.
5. Conclusion
Few would contest the significance of and future relevance of forensic science to the criminal
justice system. In any case, it is beneficial for everyone involved in the criminal justice system
to be more excited about the conditions and justifications for which forensic sciences become
a significant part of the system. I sincerely hope the readers have enjoyed learning about the
many issues and hazards related to the use of forensic science sufficiently to merit a full
investigation of its application to the body of general laws in India. I want my readers to
understand that there are dishonest individuals around. As a result, the major responsibility of
the legal executive should be to constantly audit the system in order to hold individuals
involved in it accountable and so enhance the quality of the administrations. It is also past time
for India to pass a specific law, akin to the Forensic Methodology, to deal with all matters
pertaining to forensic science. The preliminary appointed authorities have several difficulties
when processing forensic logical evidence in criminal cases, starting with assessing the
admissibility of such evidence and determining the legal relevance of the equivalent to the in-
question reality. The court date courts in India are reluctant to rely on the equivalent freely
without strong validation, as seen by the legal decisions they have made. India's preliminary
courts seek validation for confirming logical proof as a matter of training.
References
Danaher J. 2011. Blind expertise and the problem of scientific evidence. Int. J. Evid. Proof 15, 207–
231. (10.1350/ijep.2011.15.3.378)
Das, M., & Chattopadhyay, S. (2021). Ensuring reliability and validity of forensic science evidence in
the Indian criminal justice system. Journal of Forensic Science & Criminology, 9(1), 45-57.
Desai, P., & Kumar, A. (2016). Improving forensic science reliability in the Indian criminal justice
system: A case study approach. International Journal of Criminal Investigation, 4(2), 60-75.
Edmond G. 2008. Secrets of the ‘hot tub’: expert witnesses, concurrent evidence and judge-led law
reform in Australia. Civ. Justice Q. 27, 51–82.
Fisher, B. A., & Fisher, D. R. (2012). Techniques of crime scene investigation. CRC Press.
Garrett BL, Neufeld PJ. 2009. Invalid forensic science testimony and wrongful convictions. Va. Law
Rev. 95, 1–97.
Genn D. 2013. Getting to the truth: experts and judges in the ‘hot tub’. Civ. Justice Q. 32, 275–299.
Gould JB, Carrano J, Leo R. 2013. Predicting erroneous convictions: a social science approach to
miscarriages of justice See.pdf (accessed 20 April 2015).

Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language
 Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar (Pg. 265-274) 274

Innocence Project 2015. Unvalidated or improper forensic science See

www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction/unvalidated-or-improper-forensic-
science (accessed 10 May 2015).
Patil, M., & Sharma, R. (2017). Empirical analysis of forensic science reliability in the Indian criminal
justice system. Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 34(1), 61-69.
Puri, A., & Mathur, S. (2018). Enhancing forensic science reliability in the Indian criminal justice
system: A review of recent developments. Indian Journal of Criminology and Criminalistics,
39(2), 135-150.
Rennison A. 2014. Future of forensic science in the United Kingdom’. In Advances in forensic human
identification (eds Mallett X, Blythe T, Berry R.), pp. 429–438. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Robertson J. 2013. Understanding how forensic science may contribute to miscarriages of justice. Aust.
J. Forensic Sci. 45, 109–112. (10.1080/00450618.2013.790477)
Singh, S., & Shukla, A. (2019). Challenges and solutions for improving forensic science reliability in
the Indian criminal justice system. International Journal of Law, Crime, and Justice, 57, 69-
85.
V.R.Dinkar (2013) Scientiic expert evidence: determining probative value and admissibility in the
courtroom. Eastern Law House.

Cite Your Article As:

Adv. Deepali Shivaji Bhalshankar. (2023). IMPROVING FORENSIC SCIENCE RELIABILITY
IN INDIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY. Scholarly Research
Journal for Humanity Science & English Language,, 11(77), 265–274.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8141488

Copyright@2023 Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language