Question – Discuss the significance of forensic science in

criminal matters in the light of judicial decisions. Discuss

Forensic Science And Criminal Prosecution

I. Scene of Occurrence

A scene of occurrence is the meeting place of the persons involved. The parties exchange

traces with one another and with the scene, leave odds and ends and mark of tools, wearing

apparels, means of transport , hands and feet. Thus the scene of occurrence provides a wealth

of information which is useful to:

1. Establish corpus delicti

2. Provide link between the criminal , the victim and the scene of occurrence; and

3. Evaluate the pattern of events.

The scene is of great importance in almost all crimes except perhaps in cases of forgery

where the utility is limited. The examination of the scene needs planning , care and diligence.

In many cases the success or failure of the investigation depends entirely upon the proper

handling of the scene. The scene of occurrence changes rapidly and cannot be preserved

forever. Some of the evidence gets lost soon after the occurrence, the other evidence

disappears, gets contaminated or altered with further passage of time. The opportunity to

examine the scene is available only once. If the same is not fully exploited the wealth of

information is lost for ever.

Case Laws:

1. Raghunandan v State. Of U.P.

In the above case both the trial court as well as the High Court had brushed aside the

objection that the blood recovered from the place of occurrence was not sent for chemical

examination. The failure of the police to send the blood for chemical examination is a serious

case of murder , such as the one before us., is to be depreciated . In such a case the place of

occurrence is often disputed.

2. Marachalil Chandra Tukaram Talekar v State of Gujrat.

Identity of the scene:

It was argued with great vehemence in the High Court as well as in the court of sessions that
there was trial of blood from the front door of the house of the vakil into the corridor rooms

marked H and H-1 in the plan and that supported the defence theory that the deceased

Kannan received the stab injuries not in or near the house in question but somewhere far

away near the railway station. The High Court took the view that if Kannan had received the

injuries somewhere outside the house it was impossible for him to have come into the room

in view of the doctor’s evidence. It was concluded on the material placed on the record that

there could be no room for doubt that Kannan received the injuries in the room itself and not

outside, and that he was carried out of the room while life was still lingering and therefore

there would be dripping of the blood from the body during the course of transit as the injuries

were very serious and vital arteries had been cut.

[Link]:

The identification of criminals through fingerprints was the first important break-through in

the scientific investigation of crime. As usual, the judiciary and the public took some time to

believe in the utility of fingerprints as a scientific aid. The same is now recognized

throughout the world. The importance of fingerprints in criminal investigation is immense,

because they are:

Unique

Ridge pattern of each finger has an individuality. The patterns vary not only from one

individual to another , but they are different in the same individual on each finger.

Duplication of pattern has never been observed. Nor the same is expected.

Permanent

The fingerprints of an individual do not change throughout his life. In fact, the ridges appear

before birth. They start appearing during third or fourth month of pregnancy. They remain

even after the death of the individual ever till the epidermal skin is destroyed by fire,

putrefaction or is eaten by insects or other creatures.

In a murder case the body of the victim was partially burnt and buried. The same was

discovered many days after the murder. The body was completely disfigured and could not be

identified.

The investigating officer got removed the remaining skin pieces from the tips of the fingers

through a doctor. He sent them to fingerprint bureau alongwith the one authentic print of the

deceased available on his will. The bureau confirmed the identity of the deceased.
The digital skin pieces were recovered and sent to the finger print bureau. The fingerprints of

the deceased tallied with the fingerprints of the convict , available in the records,

The permanence of fingerprints permits identification of an individual even after many years,

if his fingerprint record is available. Many criminals have been identified through this

medium after years of absconding.

Universal

All individuals and hence all criminals carry this medium of identification. The finger digits

and palmar surface of the hands carry the friction ridges. The fingers have more intricate

patterns. They allow easier individualization and classification.

A criminal uses his hands in the commission of crime. He leaves marks at the scene of

occurrence or on the objects which come in contact in the commission of crime. There are

fair chances of occurrence of fingerprints , therefore in all types of crime.

Inimitable

Successful forgery of fingerprints has not been reported so far. Near perfect forgeries have

been attempted. It is possible that the advancement of science may bring the forgery still

closer to perfection but complete success in the enterprise is extremely difficult ,if not

impossible.

For all practical purposes it may be taken that it is not possible to forge a fingerprint. This is

important because no person can deny his or her fingerprints. The identification through

fingerprints is certain and infallible.

Classifiable

The scope for classification of fingerprints is large and yet the work is simple. Records of

millions of persons can be classified and kept on nicrofilms. Computerisation of fingerprint

record, and hence searches are becoming popular and is increasing the efficiency. A search

can be made virtually in seconds with the help of these devices.

Case Laws

Sufficient Evidence

1. The question was raised before the sessions Judge as to whether a conviction can be based

upon the unsupported testimony of a fingerprint expert. There is no rule of law on the point; it

is merely a matter of caution whether a court will act on such unsupported evidence or not.

The correct principle was defined by S.K. Ghose,J. in Hatendra Nath Sen v Emperor.
“ I do not think that it can be laid down as a rule of law that it is unsafe to base a conviction

on the uncorroborated testimony of a fingerprint expert. The true rule seems to me to be one

of caution that is to say, the court must not take the expert’s opinion for granted , but it must

examine his evidence in order to satisfy itself that there can be no mistake and the

responsibility is all the greater when there is no other evidence to corroborate the expert”

Uncorroborated Evidence

Bazari Hajam v King Emperor the question arose

whether it will be safe to act on the uncorroborated testimony of the fingerprints and declare

the guilt of the accused. On this point Bucknill,J., observed thus:

“ I think that apart from the fact that I should be rather sorry without any corroborative

circumstances to convict a person of a serious crime solely and entirely upon similarity of

thumb marks or finger prints, the very fact of the taking of a thumb-impression from an

accused person for the purpose of possible manufacture of the evidence by which he could be

incriminated is in itself sufficient to warrant one in setting aside the conviction upon the

understanding and upon the assumption that such was not really a fair trial.”

The above view was disapproved of by Schwabe, C.J. in Public Prosecutor v Kandasami

Thevan although the point did not directly arise in the

case as there were thumb-impressions of the accused in evidence other than that taken by the

judge in court for comparison with the thumb-impressions in the document alleged to have

been forged.

III. Track Marks

on and around the place in the form of prints and impressions (collectively called ‘marks’) of

feet, shoes, tyres, hoofs and the like. The evidence often connects the criminal with the crime

conclusively. It should, therefore be properly understood, collected, evaluated and presented

in the courts.

The track marks establish not only the presence of the culprit at the scene of crime but also

give the number of participants. The evidence is helpful in tracking down the criminals to

their houses or hide-outs, especially in India where most of the people live in rural areas. The

roads in the country side are not metalled. Besides, the criminal, ordinarily, follows

untrodden routes ; fields ,garden and stream beds. He leaves track marks on routes used
before and after the commission of the crime.

The nature of the vehicle used in the commission of crime wether it is a cycle , scooter, car,

bus, truck, tractor, rickshaw, bullock cart or a buggie can be ascertained. It is sometimes

possible to identify the individual vehicle [Link] some cases animals are involved in crimes

sometimes. For example , a horse or a camel may be used for transport ; a cow , a buffalo or a

bullock may be stolen or a dog or a tamed wild best , like a snake or a tiger may be used to

destroy or kill a human-being or a domestic animal. The type of the animal or the beast can

be found out from the track marks.

Foot Wear marks include the marks of shoes , sandals , chappals , socks and the like. The

footwear may be factory- made or hand made.

Case Laws

Rejecting the contention that the study of footprints is not a science in Din Muhammad v

Emperor , Central Provinces Police Gazette dated 27th May , 1914 pp. 125-130, the court of

the Judicial Commissioner at Nagpur (H.J. Stanyon and H.F. Hallifax, A.J. Cs ) as far back as

in 1914 held:

“The knowledge of footprints has similarly been systematized and pursued by trackers ,

mainly uncivilized and ignorant people an all other respects, all over the world . The matter is

therefore undoubtedly a science and the opinion of a person specially skilled in it is a relevant

fact, under Sec-45 of the Evidence Act “

In Re Paramban Manmmadhu, which is a bench decision of that court, delievered by Horwill,

J (Supra) the learned judge held that opinion of a foot print expert is not admissible as

evidence. Pritam Singh v State of Punjab there is an observation to

the effect that the science of identification by footprints is a rudimentary science and much

reliance cannot be placed on the result of such identification.

IV Poisons
Poisons are frequently involved in homicidal accidental or suicidal deaths. They are

sometimes used to destroy animals and plants. The detection of poisons and their

identification is an important aspect of forensic science.

The investigation of cases of poisoning is one of the most difficult tasks. The quantity of a

poison required to kill a victim is extremely small in some cases. For example , the fatal dose

of nicotine is about 50 milligrams.

Principles

The laws and principles of all the natural sciences are the bases of forensic science. In

addition,it has developed its own principles.

Law of individuality- Every object, natural or man-made, has an individuality which is not
duplicated in any other object.

This principle, at first sight appears to be contrary to common beliefs and observations. The

grains of sand or common salt , seeds of plants or twins look exactly alike. Likewise, manmade
objects: coins of the same denomination made in the same mint,currency notes printed

with the same printing blocks one after the other (excluding serial number) and typewriters of

the same make,model and batch appear to be indistinguishable. Yet the individuality is

always there. It is due to small flaws in the materials, in the arrangement of the crystals ,

imperfect stamping or due to inclusions of some extraneous matter.

The individuality has been verified in certain fields. The most extensive work has been

carried out in finger prints. Millions of prints have been checked but no two fingerprints,

even from two fingers of the same person have ever been found to be identical.

The law of individuality is of fundamental importance in forensic science. Anything and

everything involved in a crime, has an individuality. If the sane is established , it connects the

crime and the criminal.

Principle of exchange- ‘Contract exchanges traces’ is the principle of exchange. It was first
enunciated by the French scientist, Edmond Locard.

According to the principal, when a criminal or his instruments of crime come in contact with

the victim or the objects surrounding him, they leave traces. Likewise, the criminal or his

instruments pick up traces from the same contact. Thus, a mutual exchange of traces like

takes place between the criminal, the victim and the objects involved in the crime If these

traces are identified to the original source, viz., the criminal or his instrument (or vice versa),

they establish the contact and pin the crime on to the criminal. The principal of exchange is
aptly demonstrated in hit and run cases and in offences against person.

The basic requirement of the principle is the correct answer to the question ‘ What are the

places or objects with which the criminal or his tools actually came in contact?’ If the

investigating officer is able to establish the points of contact , he is likely to reap a rich

harvest of physical clues:

1. If a criminal enters the premises through a ventilator , he leaves his foot prints in dust on

the sill.

2. If he breaks a window or a door, the jimmy leaves its marks on the wooden frame.

3. The burglar, who opens a safe by an explosive, leaves the area around and the clothes

(including shoes ) covered with insulating material as well as some exploded and unexploded

explosive materials.

The criminal is likely to leave and carry minute traces only. It is seldom that he dares or

neglects to leave or carry gross objects or traces. On a thorough search, the inconspicuous

traces will always be found in all types of crimes. The minute traces connect the crime and

the criminal as effectively as the gross objects or traces.

Law of progressive change- ‘ Everything changes with the passage of time’. The rate of
change varies tremendously with different objects. Its impact on forensic science is immense.

1. The criminal undergoes rapid changes. If he is not apprehended in time, he becomes

unrecognizable except perhaps through his fingerprints, bone fractures or other characteristics

of permanent( comparatively speaking ) nature which are not always available.

2. The scene of occurrence undergoes rapid changes. The weather, the vegetable growth,

and the living beings (especially human-beings) make extensive changes in comparatively

short periods. Longer the delay in examining the scene, greater will be the changes. After

some time , the scene may become unrecognizable.

3. The objects involved in crime change gradually, the firearm barrels loosen , metal objects

rust , the shoes suffer additional wear and tear and the tools acquire new surface patterns. In

course of time the objects may loose all practical identity vis-à-vis a particular crime.

The principle, therefore, demands prompt action in all aspects of criminal investigation.

Principle of comparison- Only the like can be compared is the principle of comparison. It
emphasizes the necessity of providing like samples and specimens for comparison with the

questioned items:
1. In a murder case, a bullet is recovered from the deceased. The expert opines that the bullet

has been fired from a firearm firing high velocity projectiles like a service rifle. It is futile to

send shotguns ,pistols or revolvers as the possible suspect firearm.

2. A bunch of hair is recovered from the hands of a deceased. The expert opines that the hair

belong to a Negroid person. Hair from persons of white races for comparison will not be of

any use.

3. The questioned writing is found to have been writing with a ball pen. To send fountain pen

as a likely instrument of writing is futile.

Once handwriting available on a photograph allegedly written on a wall was compared with

the specimen written on a paper. It did not give worthwhile results.

A second set of specimens was obtained by writing on the same wall, at the same height and

with the same instrument and then photographed . It allowed comparison. (CH)

Principle of analysis- The analysis can be no better than the sample analysed. Improper
sampling and contamination render the best analysis useless. The principle emphasizes the

necessity of correct sampling and correct packing for effective use of experts.

1. A criminal while running away from the scene if occurrence brushes against a painted

surface. Some powdered particles of paint get deposited upon his clothes. The investigating

officer scraps a few grams of paint from the same surface with a pen-knife and sends it as

control sample. The result of the analysis shows that the two paints do not match. Why?

2. A small amount of dust is recovered from a small sticky patch of the shoe of a culprit. The

investigating officer collects about two kilograms of soil from the scene packs it in tin and

sends it as a control sample. The results of comparison are inconclusive. Why?

3. In a rape case, the investigating officer collects the clothes of the victim. The clothe carry

both blood and semen stains. The investigating officer dries the clothes and packs them

together and sends them through a railway parcel. He wants to know if the clothes carry

semen stains , and if so, to which blood group does the secretor belong?

The expert establishes the existence of semen but fails to give its blood grouping; because he

finds powdered blood sticking to semen stain.

Facts do not lie- ‘Facts do not lie, men can and do’ , hence the importance of circumstantial

evidence vis-à-vis oral evidence. The oral testimony depends upon the power of observation ,

assimilation and reproduction of the witness. It is modified by the power of observation,

influence, suggestions, descriptions and opinions of others and rationality. Oral evidence ,

therefore , is coloured whereas factual evidence is free from these infirmities.

But ‘facts’ can also be created:

1. A person is killed in an accident firing. The relatives want to implicate their opponents.

They procure an unlicensed firearm, fire a cartridge ,place at at the scene and plant the

firaram on the opponent.

The police recovers the shell and the firearm. The shell is married to the firearm. The police

prosecutes the person.

2. A person is in the armed forces. He is seen carrying out duty upto 1 A.M. in the unit. He

slips through the guarded premises, goes about a hundred miles, and commits a murder,

returns to his unit, enters into the guarded premises secretly and is present on his duty at

By circumstantial evidence he proves his presence in the unit throughout the night.

3. A threatens B with death. The next day B is found murdered. B had no other enemies

except A. Police suspects A as the murderer. He is not found anywhere. He is declared a

proclaimed offender. Soon afer ‘A’ appears before a magistrate and says he had gone on a

pilgrimage. But checking at the allegedly visited places, his visits to the places are not

established. He is arrested and prosecuted. In defence , he produces the jail record. He was

behind the bars at the relevant time. He escapes sentence.

Law of probability- All identifications, definite or indefinite, are made , consciously or

‘ Probability’ is mostly misunderstood. If we say that according to probability a particular

fingerprint has come from the given source, the defence counsels will make most of the word

and plead that it is not a definite opinion. Consequently, it is not customary to talk of

‘probability’ or ‘probability figures’ in counts.

Probability is the mathematical concept. It determines the chances of occurrence of a

particular event in a particular way out of a number of ways in which the event can take place

or fail to take place with equal facility. If P represents probability N1 the number of ways in

which the event can successfully occur(with equal facility) and N2 the number of ways in

which it can fail (with equal facility

We have neglected other factors (sex, age and dress) and even without these additional
factors , the identity of the deceased is established beyond a ‘ reasonable doubt’.