This document discusses the admissibility and constitutional validity of various forensic evidence techniques in Indian courts. It begins by defining evidence and forensic evidence. It then outlines certain fundamental rights from the Indian Constitution that relate to admissibility, including protections against self-incrimination (Article 20), the right to life and personal liberty (Article 21), and the right against arbitrary arrest or detention (Article 22). The document goes on to analyze the constitutional validity of specific forensic techniques like narco-analysis, DNA fingerprinting, and polygraph testing. It finds that narco-analysis and polygraph testing violate constitutional protections against self-incrimination, while DNA fingerprinting is acceptable if collected and used properly. The conclusion is

1. Admissibility Of Forensic Evidence
In The Court Of Law With
Constitutional Validity
(Article 20, 21 And 22)
By Rajshree Sable

2. Contents
• What is evidence & forensic evidence?
• What is admissibility & validity?
• Article 20, 21, 22 of Indian constitutional Act
• Narco-Analysis & its constitutional validity
• DNA fingerprinting & its constitutional validity
• Polygraph test & its constitutional validity
• Conclusion
• References

3. Definition Of Evidence
• It includes testimony, documents, photographs, maps and
video tapes.
• Trial evidence consists of:
1. The sworn testimony of witnesses, on both direct and
cross-examination, regardless of who called the witness.
2. The exhibits which have been received into evidence.
3. Any facts to which all the lawyers have agreed or
stipulated.

4. • The Law of Evidence can be defined as those rules which
directly or indirectly:
1. Control what evidence may be received;
2. Control the manner in which evidence is presented and
received;
3. Control how evidence is to be handled and considered
once it is received and what conclusions, if any, are to be
drawn from particular classes of evidence;
4. Specify the degree of satisfaction that the tribunal of fact
must attain in determining whether a fact in issue is
established and the consequences if such a level of
satisfaction is not reached.

5. • Definition of forensic science:
• Sciences used in forensics include any discipline that can
aid in the collection, preservation and analysis of evidence
such as chemistry (for the identification of explosives),
engineering (for examination of structural design) or
biology (for DNA identification or matching).
• Forensic evidence-
• Evidence usable in a court, specially the one obtained by
scientific methods such as ballistics, blood test, and DNA
test.
• Also forensic evidences are those who have strong
scientific background to prosecute the trial in a court of
law.

6. • RELEVANCY
• The principle that "relevance is an affair of probability and not
of certainty”.
• Discussions on relevancy can conclude that the various
definitions given by distinguished jurists will help only to get a
theoretical basis about the concept of relevance and it cannot
provide a better help to determine relevancy.
• ADMISSIBILITY
• Evidence, if relevant need not be admissible. Concept of
admissibility is negative.
• A piece of evidence is inadmissible if it is rejected for some
reason other than immateriality or irrelevance, and it is
admissible if there is no rule for its rejection other than
materiality or relevance.
• Science became an active truth finder in legal field. Reliability
is the reason that makes the scientific proof more attractive.

7. • INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL ACT, 1949.
• PART III
• FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
• Right to Freedom
• Article 20. Protection in respect of conviction for offences.-
(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a
law in force at the time of the commission of the Act charged as an
offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might
have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the
commission of the offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence
more than once.
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself.

8. • Article 21. Protection of life and personal liberty.-
• No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to procedure established by law.
• Article 22. Protection against arrest and detention in certain
cases
(1)No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being
informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be
denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his
choice .
(2)Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced
before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty four hours of such
arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to
the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody
beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate

9. (3) Nothing in clauses ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) shall apply (a) to any person who for
the time being is an enemy alien; or (b) to any person who is arrested
or detained under any law providing for preventive detention
(4) No law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the
detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless
(a) an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or have been, or
are qualified to be appointed as, Judges of a High Court has reported
before the expiration of the said period of three months that there is
in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention:
(5) When any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under
any law providing for preventive detention, the authority making the
order shall, as soon as may be, communicate to such person the
grounds on which the order has been made and shall afford him the
earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order

10. (6) Nothing in clause ( 5 ) shall require the authority making any
such order as is referred to in that clause to disclose facts
which such authority considers to be against the public
interest to disclose
(7) Parliament may by law prescribe
• (a) the circumstances under which, and the class or classes of
cases in which, a person may be detained for a period longer
than three months under any law providing for preventive
detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board
in accordance with the provisions of sub clause (a) of clause (
4 );
• (b) the maximum period for which any person may in any
class or classes of cases be detained under any law providing
for preventive detention; and
• (c) the procedure to be followed by an Advisory Board in an
inquiry under sub clause (a) of clause (4) Right against
Exploitation

11. Forensic admissibility of Narco-Analysis
• introduced in 1936. termed as psychological third degree
method
• “Clause (3) of Article 20 declares that no person accused
of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself. This provision may be stated to consist of the
following three components:”
• 1. it is a right pertaining to a person accused of an offence
• 2. It is a protection against compulsion to be a witness; and
• 3. It is a protection against such compulsion resulting in his
giving evidence against himself. For invocation of Article
20(3) of the constitution of India all the three ingredients
must co-exist.

12. • NARCO ANALYSIS FROM LEGAL POINT OF VIEW
• do not have any legal soundness
• violate Article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution which is the main
provision on the subject of crime investigation and trial. It deals with
the privilege against self incrimination.
• raises point of genuine issues like encroachment of an individual‘s
rights, Liberties and freedom.
• In CrPC the legislature has protected a person‘s right against self-
incrimination under section. The right against forced self-
incrimination, widely known as the Right to Silence is 161(2)
• Certain urgings have been made that Narco analysis comprises of
mental torture and hence violates the ―Right to Life as mentioned
in Article 21 as it deals with right to privacy.

13. • Evidentiary Value of Narco Analysis Test
• does not carry any evidentiary value and the Constitution
of India (Article 20) is an absolute injunction against any
attempt to make a law giving evidentiary value to it.
• There is no scientific evidence also to show that this is a
test where the truth can be got from a person in a really
foolproof manner

14. Forensic Admissibility of DNA Fingerprinting
• first reported in the year 1984 by Sir Alec Jeffrey at the University of
Leicester in England.
• The admissibility depends on its accurate and proper collection,
preservation and documentation for it’s reliability.
• Section 53 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 authorizes a police
officer to get the assistance of a medical practitioner in good faith for
the purpose of the investigation.
• The amendment of CrPC by the CrPC (Amendment) Act, 2005 has
brought two new sections which authorizes the investigating officer
to collect DNA sample from the body of the accused and the victim
with the help of medical practitioner.

15. • Right to Privacy has been included under Right to Life and
Personal Liberty or Article 21 of the Indian Constitution,
and Article 20(3) provides Right against Self-Incrimination
which protects an accused person in criminal cases from
providing evidence against himself or evidences which can
make him guilty.
• These are the articles which violates the fundamental rights
of the individual. But after the judgments of judges it is said
that, the Constitution gives protection to a person not to
be a witness against himself. However, "to be a witness"
is not equivalent to "furnishing evidence" in its widest
term and significance.
• From this it appears that there will be no constitutional
restriction on the collection of samples for DNA analysis.

16. Constitutional Validity of
Polygraph(lie detector)
• invented in 1921 by John Augustus Larson, a
medical student at the University of California at
Berkeley and a police officer, California.
• measures and records several physiological indices
such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin
conductivity while the subject is asked and answers
a series of questions.
• deceptive answers will produce physiological
responses that can be differentiated from those
associated with non-deceptive answers

17. Administration of test
• a pre-test interview to gain some preliminary information.
• Some of the questions asked are "irrelevant" others are
"diagnostic" questions, and the remainder are the
"relevant questions".
• The test is passed if the physiological responses to the
diagnostic questions are larger than those during the
relevant questions (RQ).

18. • Validity-
• little evidence to support its use
• the National Research Council has found no
evidence of effectiveness.
• The utility among sex offenders is also poor.
• a significant number of subjects will appear to be
lying, and would unfairly suffer the consequences of
"failing" the polygraph.
• The lie detector tests are violate of Article 20 (3)
that, No person accused of any offence shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself.

19. Conclusion
• On May 5, 2010, The Supreme Court of India declared use
of Narco-Analysis, brain mapping and polygraph tests on
suspects as illegal and against the constitution. As they are
violating fundamental rights of Indian constitutional Act
mainly Article 20(3) that no person accused of an offence
shall be compelled to be a witness against himself & Article
21. The use of these techniques are not to give verdict but
used for further investigation. But DNA fingerprinting is
acceptable due to statements given by the judges & and
having strong scientific backbone adherence.

20. References
• Website Links-
• http://www.legalblog.in/2011/05/narco-analysis-polygraph-
tests.html
• http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l375-Article-20-
%283%29-Of-Constitution-of-India-And-Narco-Analysis.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph
• http://www.legallyindia.com/easyblog/admissibility-of-dna-
technology-in-the-indian-legal-system-html
• http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1199182/
• PDF -
• Determining Probative Value And Admissibility Of Scientific
Evidence
• Narco-Analysis and its Evidentiary Value in India by Barcelona
Panda* Cite as: (2011) PL July

21. Thank you!!!
For Your Attention &
Patience