ADMISSIBILITY AND RELIABILITY OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA, THE UNITED STATES, AND EUROPE

Abstract

Abstract: The increasing prominence of forensic science in the adjudication of criminal cases has not only altered the process of evidentiary practice across jurisdictions, but has also raised critical issues of admissibility and reliability of scientific evidence. The present paper will involve a comparative study of legal systems in the United States, in the European jurisdictions of India and selected European countries, in the legal frameworks governing forensic evidence. It looks at how far courts are going to assess the scientific validity of expert testimonies and the institutional practices which are aimed at providing evidentiary reliability. The research concludes that the Indian framework, as represented in the Indian version in Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, is largely discretionary in nature and it relies largely on relevance and not on scrutiny of methodology resulting in the lack of consistency in judicial reasoning. By contrast, the United States uses formal admissibility criterion under the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. doctrine, which imposes litigation gatekeeping, facilitating the establishment of scientific reliability. The European jurisdiction, especially United Kingdom, focuses on institutional regulation by implementing statutory oversight mechanisms such as the Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021, being supplemented by a guarantee of fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. By combining the analysis of doctrines with comparatively evaluative analyses, the paper outlines the limitations of each model and argues that no one approach is sufficient to adequately address the epistemological and procedural issues that come with forensic evidence. It suggests the adoption of a hybrid framework between judicial scrutiny, scientific validation, and institutional regulation to increase the reliability of forensic evidence, as well as giving the defendant their just trial rights as well. The author’s study has contributed to the existing debate on evidentiary reform by providing an effective model that can serve to enhance the role of forensic science in criminal justice systems. Keywords- Forensic Evidence, Admissibility, Reliability, Daubert Standard, Expert Evidence, Criminal Adjudication, Comparative Law