Definition

Forensic Science is the application and implementation of scientific methods and techniques for the purpose of justice. It involves analyzing evidence, identify suspects, understand the circumstances of a crime, and establish connections between crime scenes, individuals, and criminal activities.

History & Development

• 700s : Chinese used fingerprints to establish identity of documents and clay sculpture, but without any formal classification system
• 1248 : A Chinese book, Hsi Duan Yu (the washing away of wrongs), contains a description of how to distinguish drowning from strangulation. This was the first recorded application of medical knowledge to the solution of crime.
• 1609 : The first treatise on systematic document examination was published by François Demelle of France
• 1686 : Marcello Malpighi, a professor of anatomy at the University of Bologna, noted fingerprint characteristics. However, he made no mention of their value as a tool for individual identification
• 1784 : In Lancaster, England, John Toms was convicted of murder on the basis of the torn edge of wad of newspaper in a pistol matching a remaining piece in his pocket. This was one of the first documented uses of physical matching.
• 1800s : Thomas Bewick, an English naturalist, used engravings of his own fingerprints to identify books he published.
• 1810 : Eugène François Vidocq, in return for a suspension of arrest and a jail sentence, made a deal with the police to establish the first detective force, the Sûreté of Paris.
• 1810 : The first recorded use of question document analysis occurred in Germany. A chemical test for a particular ink dye was applied to a document known as the Konigin Hanschritt.
• 1813 : Mathieu Orfila, a Spaniard who became professor of medicinal/forensic chemistry at University of Paris, published Traite des Poisons Tires des Regnes Mineral, Vegetal et Animal, ou Toxicologie General. Orfila is considered the father of modern toxicology. He also made significant contributions to the development of tests for the presence of blood in a forensic context and is credited as the first to attempt the use of a microscope in the assessment of blood and semen stains.
• 1823 : John Evangelist Purkinje, a professor of anatomy at the University of Breslau, Czechoslovakia, published the first paper on the nature of fingerprints and suggested a classification system based on nine major types. However, he failed to recognize their individualizing potential.
• 1828 : William Nichol invented the polarizing light microscope.
• 1830s : Adolphe Quetelet, a Belgian statistician, provided the foundation for Bertillon’s work by stating his belief that no two human bodies were exactly alike
• 1831 : Leuchs first noted amylase activity in human saliva.
• 1835 : Henry Goddard, one of Scotland Yard’s original Bow Street Runners, first used bullet comparison to catch a murderer. His comparison was based on a visible flaw in the bullet which was traced back to a mold.
• 1836 : James Marsh, an Scottish chemist, was the first to use toxicology (arsenic detection) in a jury trial.
• 1839 : H. Bayard published the first reliable procedures for the microscopic detection of sperm. He also noted the different microscopic characteristics of various different substrate fabrics.
• 1851 : Ludwig Teichmann, in Krakow, Poland, developed the first microscopic crystal test for hemoglobin using hemin crystals.
• 1854 : An English physician, Maddox, developed dry plate photography, eclipsing M. Daguerre’s wet plate on tin method. This made practical the photographing of inmates for prison records.
• 1856 : Sir William Herschel, a British officer working for the Indian Civil service, began to use thumbprints on documents both as a substitute for written signatures for illiterates and to verify document signatures.
• 1862 : The Dutch scientist J. (Izaak) Van Deen developed a presumptive test for blood using guaiac, a West Indian shrub.
• 1863 : The German scientist Schönbein first discovered the ability of hemoglobin to oxidize hydrogen peroxide making it foam. This resulted in first presumptive test for blood.
• 1864 : Odelbrecht first advocated the use of photography for the identification of criminals and the documentation of evidence and crime scenes.
• 1877 : Thomas Taylor, microscopist to U.S. Department of Agriculture suggested that markings of the palms of the hands and the tips of the fingers could be used for identification in criminal cases. Although reported in the American Journal of Microscopy and Popular Science and Scientific American, the idea was apparently never pursued from this source.
• 1879 : Rudolph Virchow, a German pathologist, was one of the first to both study hair and recognize its limitations.
• 1880 : Henry Faulds, a Scottish physician working in Tokyo, published a paper in the journal Nature suggesting that fingerprints at the scene of a crime could identify the offender. In one of the first recorded uses of fingerprints to solve a crime, Faulds used fingerprints to eliminate an innocent suspect and indicate a perpetrator in a Tokyo burglary.
• 1882 : Gilbert Thompson, a railroad builder with the U.S Geological Survey in New Mexico, put his own thumbprint on wage chits to safeguard himself from forgeries.
• 1883 : Alphonse Bertillon, a French police employee, identified the first recidivist based on his invention of anthropometry.
• 1887 : Arthur Conan Doyle published the first Sherlock Holmes story in Beeton’s Christmas Annual of London.
• 1889 : Alexandre Lacassagne, professor of forensic medicine at the University of Lyons, France, was the first to try to individualize bullets to a gun barrel. His comparisons at the time were based simply on the number of lands and grooves.
• 1891 : Hans Gross, examining magistrate and professor of criminal law at the University of Graz, Austria, published Criminal Investigation, the first comprehensive description of uses of physical evidence in solving crime. Gross is also sometimes credited with coining the word criminalistics.
• 1892 : (Sir) Francis Galton published Fingerprints, the first comprehensive book on the nature of fingerprints and their use in solving crime.
• 1892 : Juan Vucetich, an Argentinean police researcher, developed the fingerprint classification system that would come to be used in Latin America. After Vucetich implicated a mother in the murder of her own children using her bloody fingerprints, Argentina was the first country to replace anthropometry with fingerprints.
• 1894 : Alfred Dreyfus of France was convicted of treason based on a mistaken handwriting identification by Bertillon.
• 1896 : Sir Edward Richard Henry developed the print classification system that would come to be used in Europe and North America. He published Classification and Uses of Fingerprints.
• 1898 : Paul Jeserich, a forensic chemist working in Berlin, Germany, took photomicrographs of two bullets to compare, and subsequently individualize, the minutiae.
• 1900 : Karl Landsteiner first discovered human blood groups and was awarded the Nobel prize for his work in 1930. Max Richter adapted the technique to type stains. This is one of the first instances of performing validation experiments specifically to adapt a method for forensic science. Landsteiner’s continued work on the detection of blood, its species, and its type formed the basis of practically all subsequent work.
• 1901 : Paul Uhlenhuth, a German immunologist, developed the precipitin test for species. He was also one of the first to institute standards, controls, and QA/QC procedures. Wassermann (famous for developing a test for syphilis) and Schütze independently discovered and published the precipitin test, but never received due credit.
• 1901 : Sir Edward Richard Henry was appointed head of Scotland Yard and forced the adoption of fingerprint identification to replace anthropometry.
• 1901 : Henry P. DeForrest pioneered the first systematic use of fingerprints in the United States by the New York Civil Service Commission.
• 1902 : Professor R.A. Reiss, professor at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, and a pupil of Bertillon, set up one of the first academic curricula in forensic science. His forensic photography department grew into Lausanne Institute of Police Science.
• 1903 : The New York State Prison system began the first systematic use of fingerprints in United States for criminal identification.
• 1904 : Oskar and Rudolf Adler developed a presumptive test for blood based on benzidine, a new chemical developed by Merck.
• 1904 : Locard published L’enquête criminelle et les méthodes scientifique, in which appears a passage that may have given rise to the forensic precept that “Every contact leaves a trace.”
• 1906 : American President Theodore Roosevelt established Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
• 1910 : Victor Balthazard, professor of forensic medicine at the Sorbonne, with Marcelle Lambert, published the first comprehensive hair study, Le poil de l’homme et des animaux. In one of the first cases involving hairs, Rosella Rousseau was convinced to confess to murder of Germaine Bichon. Balthazard also used photographic enlargements of bullets and cartridge cases to determining weapon type and was among the first to attempt to individualize a bullet to a weapon.
• 1910 : Edmund Locard, successor to Lacassagne as professor of forensic medicine at the University of Lyons, France, established the first police crime laboratory.
• 1910 : Albert S. Osborne, an American and arguably the most influential document examiner, published Questioned Documents.
• 1912 : Masao Takayama developed another microscopic crystal test for hemoglobin using hemochromogen crystals.
• 1913 : Victor Balthazard, professor of forensic medicine at the Sorbonne, published the first article on individualizing bullet markings.
• 1915 : Leone Lattes, professor at the Institute of Forensic Medicine in Turin Italy, developed the first antibody test for ABO blood groups. He first used the test in casework to resolve a marital dispute. He published L’Individualità del sangue nella biologia, nella clinica, nella medicina, legale, the first book dealing not only with clinical issues, but heritability, paternity, and typing of dried stains.
• 1915 : International Association for Criminal Identification, (to become The International Association of Identification (IAI), was organized in Oakland, California.
• 1916 : Albert Schneider of Berkeley, California first used a vacuum apparatus to collect trace evidence.
• 1918 : Edmond Locard first suggested 12 matching points as a positive fingerprint identification.
• 1920 : Charles E. Waite was the first to catalog manufacturing data about weapons.
• 1920s : Georg Popp pioneered the use of botanical identification in forensic work.
• 1920s : Luke May, one of the first American criminalists, pioneered striation analysis in tool mark comparison, including an attempt at statistical validation. In 1930 he published The identification of knives, tools and instruments, a positive science, in The American Journal of Police Science.
• 1920s : Calvin Goddard, with Charles Waite, Phillip O. Gravelle, and John H Fisher, perfected the comparison microscope for use in bullet comparison.
• 1921 : John Larson and Leonard Keeler designed the portable polygraph.
• 1923 : Vittorio Siracusa, working at the Institute of Legal Medicine of the R. University of Messina, Italy, developed the absorption-elution test for ABO blood typing of stains. Along with his mentor, Lattes also performed significant work on the absorption-inhibition technique.
• 1923 : In Frye v. United States, polygraph test results were ruled inadmissible. The federal ruling introduced the concept of general acceptance and stated that polygraph testing did not meet that criterion.
• 1924 : August Vollmer, as chief of police in Los Angeles, California, implemented the first U.S. police crime laboratory.
• 1925 : Saburo Sirai, a Japanese scientist, is credited with the first recognition of secretion of group-specific antigens into body fluids other than blood.
• 1926 : The case of Sacco and Vanzetti, which took place in Bridgewater, Massachusetts, was responsible for popularizing the use of the comparison microscope for bullet comparison. Calvin Goddard’s conclusions were upheld when the evidence was reexamined in 1961.
• 1927 : Landsteiner and Levine first detected the M, N, and P blood factors leading to development of the MNSs and P typing systems.
• 1928 : Meüller was the first medico-legal investigator to suggest the identification of salivary amylase as a presumptive test for salivary stains.
• 1929 : K. I. Yosida, a Japanese scientist, conducted the first comprehensive investigation establishing the existence of serological isoantibodies in body fluids other than blood.
• 1929 : Calvin Goddard’s work on the St. Valentine’s day massacre led to the founding of the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory on the campus of Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
• 1930 : American Journal of Police Science was founded and published by staff of Goddard’s Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory in Chicago. In 1932, it was absorbed by Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, becoming the Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and police science.
• 1931 : Franz Josef Holzer, an Austrian scientist, working at the Institute for Forensic Medicine of the University of Innsbruck, developed the absorption-inhibition ABO typing technique that became the basis of that commonly used in forensic laboratories. It was based on the prior work of Siracusa and Lattes.
• 1932 : The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime laboratory was created.
• 1935 : Frits Zernike, a Dutch physicist, invented the first interference contrast microscope, a phase contrast microscope, an achievement for which he won the Nobel prize in 1953.
• 1937 : Holzer published the first paper addressing the usefulness of secretor status for forensic applications.
• 1937 : Walter Specht, at the University Institute for Legal Medicine and Scientific Criminalistics in Jena, Germany, developed the chemiluminescent reagent luminol as a presumptive test for blood.
• 1937 : Paul Kirk assumed leadership of the criminology program at the University of California at Berkeley. In 1945, he formalized a major in technical criminology.
• 1938 : M. Polonovski and M. Jayle first identified haptoglobin.
• 1940 : Landsteiner and A.S. Wiener first described Rh blood groups.
• 1940 : Vincent Hnizda, a chemist with the Ethyl Corporation, was probably the first to analyze ignitable fluid. He used a vacuum distillation apparatus.
• 1941 : Murray Hill of Bell Labs initiated the study voiceprint identification. The technique was refined by L.G. Kersta.
• 1945 : Frank Lundquist, working at the Legal Medicine Unit at the University of Copenhagen, developed the acid phosphatase test for semen.
• 1946 : Mourant first described the Lewis blood group system.
• 1946 : R.R. Race first described the Kell blood group system
• 1950 : M. Cutbush, and colleagues first described the Duffy blood group system.
• 1950 : August Vollmer, chief of police of Berkeley, California, established the school of criminology at the University of California at Berkeley. Paul Kirk presided over the major of criminalistics within the school.
• 1950 : Max Frei-Sulzer, founder of the first Swiss criminalistics laboratory, developed the tape lift method of collecting trace evidence.
• 1950 : The American Academy of Forensic Science (AAFS) was formed in Chicago, Illinois. The group also began publication of the Journal of Forensic Science (JFS).
• 1951 : F. H. Allen and colleagues first described the Kidd blood grouping system.
• 1953 : Kirk published Crime Investigation, one of the first comprehensive criminalistics and crime investigation texts that encompassed theory in addition to practice.
• 1954 : R. F. Borkenstein, captain of the Indiana State Police, invented the Breathalyzer for field sobriety testing.
• 1958 : A. S. Weiner and colleagues introduced the use of H-lectin to determine positively O blood type.
• 1959 : Hirshfeld first identified the polymorphic nature of group specific component (Gc).
• 1960 : Lucas, in Canada, described the application of gas chromatography (GC) to the identification of petroleum products in the forensic laboratory and discussed potential limitations in the brand identity of gasoline.
• 1960s : Maurice Muller, a Swiss scientist, adapted the Ouchterlony antibody-antigen diffusion test for precipiten testing to determine species.
• 1963 : D.A. Hopkinson and colleagues first identified the polymorphic nature of erythrocyte acid phosphatase (EAP).
• 1964 : N. Spencer and colleagues first identified the polymorphic nature of red cell phosphoglucomutase (PGM).
• 1966 : R. A. Fildes and H. Harris first identified the polymorphic nature of red cell adenylate cyclase (AK).
• 1966 : Brian J. Culliford and Brian Wraxall developed the immunoelectrophoretic technique for haptoglobin typing in bloodstains.
• 1967 : Culliford, of the British Metropolitan Police Laboratory, initiated the development of gel-based methods to test for isoenzymes in dried bloodstains. He was also instrumental in the development and dissemination of methods for testing proteins and isoenzymes in both blood and other body fluids and secretions.
• 1968 : Spencer and colleagues first identified the polymorphic nature of red cell adenosine deaminase (ADA).
• 1971 : Culliford published The Examination and Typing of Bloodstains in the Crime Laboratory, generally accepted as responsible for disseminating reliable protocols for the typing of polymorphic protein and enzyme markers to the United States and worldwide.
• 1973 : Hopkinson and colleagues first identified the polymorphic nature of esterase D (ESD).
• 1974 : The detection of gunshot residue (GSR) using scanning electron microscopy with electron dispersive X-rays (SEMEDX) technology was developed by J. E. Wessel, P. F. Jones, Q. Y. Kwan, R. S. Nesbitt and E. J. Rattin at Aerospace Corporation.
• 1975 : J. Kompf and colleagues, working in Germany, first identified the polymorphic nature of red cell glyoxalase (GLO).
• 1975 : The Federal Rules of Evidence, originally promulgated by the U.S. Supreme Court, were enacted as a congressional statute. They are based on the relevancy standard in which scientific evidence that is deemed more prejudicial than probative may not be admitted.
• 1976 : Zoro and Hadley in the United Kingdom first evaluated GC-MS for forensic purposes.
• 1977 : Fuseo Matsumur, a trace evidence examiner at the Saga Prefectural Crime Laboratory of the National Police Agency of Japan, notices his own fingerprints developing on microscope slides while mounting hairs from a taxi driver murder case. He relates the information to co-worker Masato Soba, a latent print examiner. Soba would later that year be the first to develop latent prints intentionally by “Superglue” fuming.
• 1977 : The fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer (FTIR) is adapted for use in the forensic laboratory.
• 1977 : The FBI introduced the beginnings of its Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) with the first computerized scans of fingerprints.
• 1978 : Brian Wraxall and Mark Stolorow developed the “multisystem” method for testing the PGM, ESD, and GLO isoenzyme systems simultaneously. They also developed methods for typing blood serum proteins such as haptoglobin and Gc.
• 1984 : Alec Jeffreys developed the first DNA profiling test. It involved detection of a multilocus RFLP pattern. He published his findings in Nature in 1985.
• 1986 : In the first use of DNA to solve a crime, Jeffreys used DNA profiling to identify Colin Pitchfork as the murderer of two young girls in the English Midlands. Significantly, in the course of the investigation, DNA was first used to exonerate an innocent suspect.
• 1983 : The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was first conceived by Kary Mullis, while he was working at Cetus Corporation. The first paper on the technique was not published until 1985.
• 1986 : The human genetics group at Cetus Corporation, led by Henry Erlich, developed the PCR technique for a number of clinical and forensic applications. This resulted in development of the first commercial PCR typing kit specifically for forensic use, HLA DQα (DQA1), about 2 years later.
• 1986 : In People v. Pestinikas, Edward Blake first used PCR-based DNA testing (HLA DQα) , to confirm different autopsy samples to be from the same person. The evidence was accepted by a civil court. This was also the first use of any kind of DNA testing in the United States
• 1987 : DNA profiling was introduced for the first time in a U.S. criminal court. Based on RFLP analysis performed by Lifecodes, Tommy Lee Andrews was convicted of a series of sexual assaults in Orlando, Florida.
• 1987 : New York v. Castro was the first case in which the admissibility of DNA was seriously challenged. It set in motion a string of events that culminated in a call for certification, accreditation, standardization, and quality control guidelines for both DNA laboratories and the general forensic community.
• 1988 : Lewellen, McCurdy, and Horton, and Asselin, Leslie, and McKinley both publish milestone papers introducing a novel procedure for the analysis of drugs in whole blood by homogeneous enzyme immunoassay (EMIT).
• 1990 : K. Kasai and colleagues published the first paper suggesting the D1S80 locus (pMCT118) for forensic DNA analysis. D1S80 was subsequently developed by Cetus (subsequently Roche Molecular Systems) corporation as a commercially available forensic DNA typing system.
• 1991 : Walsh Automation Inc., in Montreal, launched development of an automated imaging system called the Integrated Ballistics Identification System, or IBIS, for comparison of the marks left on fired bullets, cartridge cases, and shell casings. This system was subsequently developed for the U.S. market in collaboration with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF).
• 1992 : In response to concerns about the practice of forensic DNA analysis and interpretation of the results, the National Research Council Committee on Forensic DNA (NRC I) published DNA Technology in Forensic Science.
• 1992 : Thomas Caskey, professor at Baylor University in Texas, and colleagues published the first paper suggesting the use of short tandem repeats for forensic DNA analysis. Promega corporation and Perkin-Elmer corporation in collaboration with Roche Molecular Systems independently developed commercial kits for forensic DNA STR typing.
• 1992 : The FBI contracted with Mnemonic Systems to developed Drugfire, an automated imaging system to compare marks left on cartridge cases and shell casings. The ability to compare fired bullets was subsequently added.
• 1993 : In Daubert et al. v. Merrell Dow, a U.S. federal court relaxed the Frye standard for admission of scientific evidence and conferred on the judge a “gatekeeping” role. The ruling cited Karl Popper’s views that scientific theories are falsifiable as a criterion for whether something is “scientific knowledge” and should be admissible.
• 1994 : Roche Molecular Systems (formerly Cetus) released a set of five additional DNA markers (“polymarker”) to add to the HLA-DQA1 forensic DNA typing system.
• 1996 : In response to continued concerns about the statistical interpretation of forensic DNA evidence, a second National Research Council Committee on Forensic DNA (NRC II) was convened and published The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence.
• 1996 : The FBI introduced computerized searches of the AFIS fingerprint database. Live scan and card scan devices allowed interdepartmental submissions.
• 1996 : In Tennessee v. Ware, mitochondrial DNA typing was admitted for the first time in a U.S. court.
• 1998 : An FBI DNA database, NIDIS, enabling interstate cooperation in linking crimes, was put into practice.
• 1999 : The FBI upgraded its computerized fingerprint database and implemented the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), allowing paperless submission, storage, and search capabilities directly to the national database maintained at the FBI.
• 1999 : A Memorandum of Understanding is signed between the FBI and ATF, allowing the use of the National Integrated Ballistics Network (NIBIN), to facilitate exchange of firearms data between Drugfire and IBIS.

History of Forensic Science in India

• 1849 : First Chemical laboratory established in Madras. Similar labs were established in Calcutta in 1853, Agra in 1864 & Bombay in 1870.
• 1879 : Anthropometric Bureau in Calcutta was established
• 1897 : First Fingerprint bureau in the world was established in Calcutta. Richard Henry developed Ten finger Fingerprint Classification with the aid by Khan Bahadur Azizul Huq & Rai Bahadur Hem Chandra Sen
• 1898 : Nagpur Department of Explosives established. Five Regional offices were established in : Kolkata, Bombay, Madras, Agra, Gwalior. Three Sub offices were established in Sivakasi, Domia & Asansol.
• 1902 : Calcutta CID was established. Rai Bahadur pandit shambhu nath is considered as Father of Indian CID.
• 1904 : GEQD Kolkata established Headed by C.R.Hardless
  • 1906 transferred to Shimla GEQD Headed by F Brewster under CID
    • 1949 S.N Sen 1st Indian Head 
• 1910 : Kolkata Serology department was established. It was later renamed after Independence as Office of serologist & chemical examiner to the Government of India.
• 1915 : Footprint Section under CID Kolkata was established.
• 1917 : Note Forgery Section under CID Kolkata was established.
• 1930 : A Ballistics laboratory along with an Arms expert in Kolkata was established.
• 1952 : SFSL Kolkata was established.
• 1905 : CFPB Shimla established on the recommendation of Royal Police Commission. But later in 1922 was abolished on the recommendation of Inchcape Committee
• 1955 : CFPB Delhi was established under IB later was Transferred under CBI in 1973
• 1956 : CDTS Kolkata was established
• 1957 : CFSL Kolkata was established. In 1970 Neutron activation analysis under CFSL Kolkata was set up at BARC Trombay
• 1960 : Indian Academy of forensic science established
• 1972 : LNJN NICFS Delhi was established
• 1983 : Post of Chief forensic scientist & Forensic science directorate created under BPR&D on the recommendation of V.K.Street, UK.
• 1998 : DNA typing facility in CFSL Kolkata was started.

• Merger of GEQD
  • GEQD Kolkata merged with CFSL Kolkata
  • GEQD Shimla merged with CFSL Chandigarh
  • GEQD Hyderabad merged with CFSL Hyderabad
• Centre of Excellence
  • CFSL Kolkata: Biology
  • CFSL Hyderabad: Chemical
  • CFSL Chandigarh: Physical
• “ Neutron activation brought under CFSL Hyderabad from BARC Trombay”

Committee for establishment of SFSL

• Central forensic science advisory committee,1959 under MHA, N.Delhi later transformed into Standing Committee on Forensics Science, 1972 under BPR&D still exist
• Central medico legal advisory committee,1955 under MHA, N.Delhi later Dissolved

Committee on Teaching of forensic science in University

• Central advisory committee on forensics
  • Headed by K.F. Rustamji
  • Advised by UGC head DS Kothar & BPR&D head DP Kohli

Scope

The scope of forensic science is broad and encompasses various scientific disciplines and applications. Here are the primary areas:

1. Crime Scene Investigation: Involves the identification, documentation, collection, and preservation of evidence at crime scenes, ensuring its integrity for analysis.

2. Forensic Biology and DNA Analysis: Analyzes biological samples (e.g., blood, saliva, hair) for DNA profiling, crucial for identifying individuals and establishing connections between victims and suspects.

3. Forensic Chemistry: Focuses on analyzing substances like drugs, poisons, explosives, and other chemicals found at crime scenes to understand their composition and relevance.

4. Forensic Toxicology: Studies the effects of drugs, alcohol, poisons, and other chemicals in the body to help determine cause of death, impairment, or poisoning.

5. Forensic Pathology: Examines bodies to determine the cause and manner of death, often involving autopsies and analysis of injuries, disease, or trauma.

6. Forensic Anthropology: Analyzes human skeletal remains to establish identity, cause of death, and other information, particularly when the body is decomposed.

7. Forensic Odontology: Uses dental records and bite mark analysis to help identify victims or connect suspects to a crime.

8. Forensic Entomology: Studies insects and other organisms found on decomposing remains to estimate time of death and other forensic details.

9. Forensic Ballistics: Examines firearms, bullets, gunshot residues, and related materials to determine how a shooting occurred and identify weapons.

10. Forensic Document Examination: Analyzes handwriting, typesetting, ink, paper, and other document features to authenticate or detect forgery.

11. Digital Forensics: Investigates digital devices and data (e.g., computers, smartphones, networks) to recover, analyze, and interpret electronic evidence.

12. Forensic Psychology: Assesses the mental state of suspects, witnesses, and victims to determine competency, intent, or psychological motives.

13. Forensic Accounting: Analyzes financial records to detect fraud, embezzlement, or financial misconduct.

14. Forensic Engineering: Investigates accidents, structural failures, and product malfunctions to determine the cause and potential negligence.

15. Wildlife Forensics: Applies forensic science techniques to crimes involving animals, such as poaching and illegal trade of endangered species.

16. Cyber Forensics: Focuses on investigating cybercrimes, including hacking, cyberstalking, and other internet-based crimes.

17. Environmental Forensics: Analyzes environmental contamination to identify sources of pollution and hold parties accountable for environmental crimes.

18. Forensic Linguistics: Examines language patterns, word choice, and grammar in written or spoken communication to assess authorship or interpret meaning in legal contexts.

19. Forensic Archeology: Combines archeological methods with forensic science to uncover and examine remains and artifacts from historic crime scenes or mass graves.

Ethics in Forensic Science

Key aspects of ethics in forensic science:

1. Objectivity and Impartiality: Forensic scientists must remain unbiased, providing conclusions based solely on evidence, without personal beliefs or external pressures influencing their findings.

2. Accuracy and Reliability: Forensic analysis should follow established protocols and methods to ensure results are accurate, reproducible, and scientifically valid.

3. Confidentiality: Sensitive information from cases must be kept confidential to protect the rights and privacy of individuals involved, with data shared only with authorized personnel.

4. Integrity of Evidence: Evidence must be collected, handled, and stored correctly to prevent contamination, loss, or tampering, maintaining a strict chain of custody.

5. Honesty in Reporting: Reports should accurately reflect findings, including any limitations or uncertainties, without exaggerating results or making unsupported conclusions.

6. Competence: Forensic scientists should work within their area of expertise, continuously updating their skills and knowledge to provide reliable analysis.

7. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest: Scientists should disclose and avoid any conflicts that might compromise their objectivity, such as personal, financial, or professional interests.

8. Testimony Integrity: When testifying, forensic experts should communicate findings truthfully, clearly, and without bias, ensuring they do not mislead the court.

9. Respect for Human Rights: All forensic work should respect individuals’ rights, avoid unethical practices, and support justice without discrimination.

10. Accountability: Forensic scientists should be accountable for their work, open to peer review, and willing to admit and correct errors to maintain public trust in the field.

Each ethical principle ensures that forensic science upholds justice, reliability, and public confidence in legal proceedings.

Nature & Types

Physical Evidence: Any tangible items that may be found at the crime scene, on the victims, or on the culprit are referred to as physical evidence. 

Trace Evidence: The term “tracing evidence” refers to physical evidence that is present in minute but quantifiable numbers.

In a criminal investigation, the analysis of the evidence acquired at the scene is utilized to support or refute the case’s facts. 

Physical evidence can be either:

• Primary Evidence: Directly proves a fact, like an eyewitness testimony or video footage showing an event.
• Corroborative evidence: Correlating data, which frequently validates or supports a criminal hypothesis,
• Circumstantial evidence:  Infers a conclusion indirectly about crime.
• Conflicting evidence: Irreconcilable evidence that comes from different sources
• Exculpatory evidence: Evidence tending to establish a criminal defendant’s innocence 
• Incriminating evidence: Evidence tending to establish guilt
• Inceptive evidence: It is used to show whether or not a crime has been committed.
• Testimonial Evidence: Statements made by witnesses or experts under oath.
• Hearsay Evidence: Statements made outside the court, generally not admissible unless exceptions apply.

Search methods

There are several common search methods, each method is chosen based on the size, type, and nature of the search area and the specific goals of the investigation or study.

• Grid Search: The search area is divided into a grid, and each section is thoroughly searched. Useful for small, confined areas.
• Zone or Sector Search: The area is divided into zones or sectors, and each one is searched individually. This is ideal for complex scenes with various rooms or barriers.
• Spiral Search: The searcher starts at a central point and moves outward in a circular or spiral pattern. This method is useful in large, open areas.
• Line or Strip Search: Searchers line up and move in a straight line across the area. Each person covers a specific width to ensure no gaps. This is effective for large, flat areas.

• Wheel Search: Similar to the zone search, but typically divides the area into sectors, each of which is searched thoroughly. Often used for large, specific search areas.
• Random Search: There is no systematic pattern; the search is conducted randomly, often in cases where time is limited, and precision is less critical.

Collection, Preservation, Packing & Forwarding of Physical & Trace evidence for forensic analyses

1. Collection of Physical & Trace Evidence

• Goal: Evidence is collected accurately, avoiding contamination or degradation.
• Types of Evidence:
  • Physical Evidence: Larger, visible items like weapons, clothing, and bloodstains.
  • Trace Evidence: Microscopic or smaller materials, such as hair, fibers, glass fragments, and soil.
• Steps:
  • Document Scene: Photographs, videos, and detailed notes are taken before any items are moved or collected.
  • Prioritize Evidence: Fragile or degradable evidence, such as biological samples, is collected first to prevent deterioration.
  • Use Appropriate Tools: Tweezers, gloves, and masks are used to avoid contamination; bare hands do not touch evidence.
  • Establish Chain of Custody: Every handler and transfer of evidence is recorded to maintain legal admissibility.

2. Preservation of Physical & Trace Evidence

• Goal: Evidence degradation or alteration is prevented until analysis.
• Methods:
  • Temperature Control: Biological samples are refrigerated or frozen to prevent bacterial growth.
  • Prevent Contamination: Different types of evidence are stored separately to avoid cross-contamination, such as keeping biological samples isolated.
  • Protection from Environment: Evidence is shielded from sunlight, humidity, and extreme temperatures to prevent degradation.
  • Minimize Handling: Direct handling is limited, and unnecessary movement or contact with evidence items is avoided.
• Documentation:
  • Each item is labeled with a unique identifier, date, and collection details.
  • Any preservation techniques or changes in the evidence’s condition after collection are documented.

3. Packing of Physical & Trace Evidence

• Goal: Evidence is packaged securely for lab transport, maintaining its integrity.
• Packing Techniques:
  • Use Appropriate Packaging Materials:
    • Biological evidence is placed in paper bags or envelopes (plastic is avoided to prevent DNA degradation).
    • Trace evidence, like fibers and hair, is stored in small envelopes, glass vials, or druggist folds.
    • Sharp objects are placed in rigid, puncture-resistant containers to prevent injury and contamination.
  • Label Packaging: Each package is clearly labeled with evidence type, date, case number, and collector’s name.
  • Seal Containers: Tamper-evident tape and seals are used to prevent unauthorized access.
• Special Considerations:
  • Evidence is packed separately to prevent cross-contamination, especially for biological samples.
  • Hazardous materials are double-bagged to ensure secure containment.

4. Forwarding Evidence for Forensic Analysis

• Goal: Evidence is transported to the forensic lab, preserving the chain of custody and ensuring safe handling.
• Procedures:
  • Chain of Custody Documentation: All necessary documentation, including transfer forms outlining the evidence’s history and handling, is completed.
  • Forwarding Letter: A formal note accompanies the items sent to the lab, outlining the purpose, contents, and authorities’ signatures.
  • Secure Transport: Lockable containers or tamper-evident bags are used, with handling limited to authorized personnel only.
  • Special Handling Instructions: Specific handling requirements (e.g., refrigeration, fragile material) are clearly indicated on packaging and transfer forms.

Chain of Custody

Chain of custody is the process of maintaining and documenting the handling, transfer, and storage of evidence from the moment it is collected until it is presented in court or analysis is completed. It ensures that evidence is accounted for and remains uncontaminated and tamper-free, preserving its integrity for legal and investigative purposes.

Purpose:

• Legal Integrity: Establishes evidence as admissible in court by proving it has not been altered or tampered with.
• Accountability: Ensures that every individual who handles the evidence can be identified, supporting transparency in evidence handling.
• Authenticity: Confirms that evidence presented in court is the same as what was originally collected at the scene.

Key Components:

• Documentation:
  • Each piece of evidence is accompanied by a chain of custody form that records the unique identifier, case details, date, time, and location of collection.
  • Any transfer, examination, or alteration to the evidence must be documented in real-time, noting the name of each handler and any changes observed.
• Unique Identification:
  • Evidence items are tagged or labeled with unique identifiers, like barcodes or alphanumeric codes, that correspond to chain of custody records.
  • Tags include information such as the case number, collection date, location, and evidence type.
• Custody Transfers:
  • Each transfer or handoff of evidence from one individual to another is logged, with signatures or initials from both parties to verify accountability.
  • Only authorized personnel can access or handle evidence, reducing the risk of unauthorized interference.
• Security Measures:
  • Evidence is stored in secure, controlled-access environments (e.g., locked evidence rooms or cabinets) when not being examined.
  • Security protocols include limited access, tamper-evident seals, and alarm systems to prevent unauthorized access.

Process:

1. Collection:
   • Evidence is collected at the scene, documented thoroughly, and tagged with identifying information.
   • The chain of custody form is initiated, noting collection details and the identity of the collector.
2. Transfer and Handling:
   • Evidence is transferred as needed for transport, analysis, or storage. Each transfer is logged, with both the sender and receiver recording the transaction.
   • Handling is minimized to reduce contamination or damage; appropriate tools (gloves, forceps) are used.
3. Storage:
   • Evidence is stored securely, with conditions (e.g., temperature control) maintained according to evidence type.
   • Log entries are made for any access or movement within storage facilities.
4. Analysis:
   • Evidence analyzed in labs is checked out and documented, noting the purpose and timeframe of the examination.
   • Any alteration in the condition of evidence during analysis is documented, and chain of custody records are updated.
5. Court Presentation:
   • When evidence is presented in court, chain of custody documents are provided to establish its authenticity and reliability.
   • After court proceedings, evidence is either stored, returned, or appropriately disposed of, with documentation maintained.

Importance:

• Ensures Reliability: A well-maintained chain of custody supports the credibility of evidence, increasing the reliability of forensic results.
• Protects Against Legal Challenges: Gaps or inconsistencies in chain of custody documentation can lead to evidence exclusion in court.
• Maintains Public Trust: Proper evidence handling builds public trust in investigative and legal institutions, showing transparency and accountability.

Challenges:

• Human Error: Mistakes in labeling, documentation, or handling can create gaps or inaccuracies.
• Storage Limitations: Inadequate facilities or security can compromise evidence integrity.
• Complexity in High-Volume Cases: Managing large amounts of evidence over long periods can strain record-keeping and storage systems.

Nature of Crime Scene

Crime Scene is the location where a crime has occurred or where evidence of a crime may be found. Its primary function is to serve as the physical space that holds crucial evidence. Crime scene could be static means a single, immovable location where the crime occurred (e.g., a room, building) or it could be dynamic in nature, involving movement, such as in a car chase or where evidence may have been transferred between locations.

Types of Crime Scene

Crime scenes vary based on

1. Location

• Indoor: Crime scenes located within enclosed structures (e.g., homes, buildings).
• Outdoor: Crime scenes located outside in open areas (e.g., streets, fields).
• Mobile: Crime scenes associated with vehicles or other mobile objects that can move from one place to another.

2. Occurrence

• Primary Scene: The main location where the crime took place.
• Secondary Scene: Additional locations related to the crime, where evidence may have been moved or found (e.g., a suspect’s home, vehicle).

3. Size

• Microscopic: Small-scale crime scenes that focus on specific, minute pieces of evidence (e.g., bloodstains, fingerprints).
• Macroscopic: Large-scale crime scenes that encompass entire areas or rooms (e.g., a whole house, a section of a forest).

4. Type of Crime

• Homicide: Crime scenes involving unlawful death.
• Suicide: Scenes where a death appears to be self-inflicted.
• Accidental: Scenes where incidents result in unintended harm or death, often requiring verification that no foul play was involved.

5. Condition

• Organised: Crime scenes that appear planned, showing evidence of premeditation and careful actions by the perpetrator.
• Unorganised: Crime scenes that appear chaotic, often impulsive, and lacking order, possibly suggesting a spontaneous act or inexperienced perpetrator.

6. Criminal Activity

• Passive: Crime scenes where the criminal activity is low-energy or involves minimal physical interaction (e.g., poisoning, fraud).
• Active: Crime scenes with high-energy interactions, often involving direct physical contact or aggression (e.g., assaults, break-ins).

Preservation of Crime Scenes

• Preserving a crime scene is crucial to avoid contamination or loss of evidence. Preservation involves careful, methodical steps to secure the scene and protect all physical, biological, and digital evidence.

• Steps in Crime Scene Preservation:

  • Securing the Scene: First responders secure the perimeter, restricting unauthorized access.
  • Documentation: Detailed photography, videography, sketches, and notes are taken before evidence collection.
  • Search Methods: Using methods like grid, spiral, or zone search to systematically locate all evidence.
  • Collection of Evidence:
    • Handling Biological Evidence: Use gloves, masks, and sterile equipment to prevent contamination.
    • Handling Digital Evidence: Follow cyber protocols to ensure the integrity of digital data.
    • Proper Packaging: Each piece of evidence is packed separately in appropriate containers (e.g., paper bags for biological samples, plastic bags for non-biological).
  • Labeling and Chain of Custody: Label all evidence with details such as the case number, date, and time of collection. Chain of custody ensures evidence remains unaltered and accounted for.

• Challenges in Crime Scene Preservation:

  • Environmental Factors: Weather or natural conditions (like rain or heat) may degrade evidence in outdoor scenes.
  • Human Interference: Unauthorized personnel or onlookers may disturb or contaminate the scene.
  • Time-Sensitive Evidence: Biological evidence and certain chemicals deteriorate over time, requiring prompt collection.

Criminal Investigations

Criminal investigations aim to systematically collect, analyze, and preserve evidence to reconstruct events and establish facts that identify suspects and victims, ultimately bringing perpetrators to justice. Investigators employ various forensic techniques and methods based on the crime type, scene characteristics, and the nature of the evidence.

1. Unnatural Deaths

• Definition: Unnatural deaths include fatalities from external causes such as homicide, suicide, accidental death, or unexplained circumstances.
• Investigative Focus:
  • Autopsy and Medical Examination: Determines the cause and manner of death (e.g., asphyxiation, stabbing, poisoning).
  • Scene Analysis: Collect evidence from the death scene, including bloodstains, fingerprints, and personal items.
  • Witness Testimonies: Interviews with family, friends, or witnesses to understand the victim’s background, relationships, and any threats.
• Types of Evidence: Bloodstains, fingerprints, weapon marks, toxicology reports, medical records.

2. Criminal Assaults

• Definition: Criminal assaults are violent physical attacks on individuals, potentially leading to serious injury or death.
• Investigative Focus:
  • Injury Analysis: Examine the nature of injuries (e.g., blunt force trauma, lacerations) to determine the type of weapon used and the sequence of events.
  • Suspect Identification: Gather fingerprints, DNA, or eyewitness statements to identify the assailant.
  • Behavioral Analysis: Profiling techniques may help understand the motive and pattern of the attacker.
• Types of Evidence: DNA (e.g., blood, saliva), fingerprints, weapon traces, clothing fibers, and CCTV footage.

3. Sexual Offenses

• Definition: Sexual offenses include crimes involving sexual assault, molestation, and rape, often associated with physical, psychological, and forensic challenges.
• Investigative Focus:
  • Victim Examination: A medical exam, including a Sexual Assault Evidence Kit (SAEK), is conducted to collect biological evidence and assess injuries.
  • Collection of Biological Evidence: DNA evidence (e.g., bodily fluids, hair) is crucial in linking the suspect to the victim.
  • Interviewing Victims and Witnesses: Sensitive questioning and counseling are provided to support the victim and gather information.
• Types of Evidence: Bodily fluids, hair, fibers, bruising patterns, and items of clothing.

4. Poisoning

• Definition: Poisoning involves the intentional or accidental ingestion, inhalation, or exposure to toxic substances leading to injury or death.
• Investigative Focus:
  • Toxicology Tests: Conduct tests on blood, urine, stomach contents, and tissues to identify toxins or drugs.
  • Scene Analysis: Search for signs of poison containers, syringes, or medications at the scene.
  • Background Check: Gather information about the victim’s lifestyle, relationships, and any recent activities involving substances.
• Types of Evidence: Chemical residues, medications, bodily fluids, autopsy reports, and environmental samples.

5. Vehicular Accidents

• Definition: Vehicular accidents cover collisions and hit-and-run cases involving vehicles, which may lead to property damage, injury, or fatalities.
• Investigative Focus:
  • Scene Reconstruction: Analyze skid marks, vehicle damage, and debris to reconstruct the event’s timeline and possible causes.
  • Witness Accounts and Surveillance Footage: Testimonies and video evidence aid in understanding circumstances and identifying responsible individuals.
  • Mechanical Inspection: Examine vehicle conditions, such as brake functionality, tire quality, and possible defects.
• Types of Evidence: Tire marks, debris, vehicle parts, CCTV footage, injury patterns, and toxicology reports.

Courts

The judicial system in India is organized in a hierarchy to address civil and criminal cases, each level having specific types, powers, and jurisdictions. Courts operate under various legal frameworks, such as the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), 1973, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which also define the role of experts and admissibility of evidence.

Types of Courts, Powers, and Jurisdiction

• Supreme Court of India:

  • Jurisdiction: Apex court with original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction.
  • Powers: Has the authority over constitutional matters, appeals, and disputes between states and the central government.

• High Courts:

  • Jurisdiction: Each state or union territory has a High Court with original and appellate jurisdiction.
  • Powers: Handles cases under its territorial jurisdiction, can hear appeals, and has supervisory powers over subordinate courts.

• District and Sessions Courts:

  • Jurisdiction: Serve as the principal courts in a district for both civil (District Court) and criminal cases (Sessions Court).
  • Powers: District Courts hear civil cases, while Sessions Courts handle serious criminal cases, such as those involving severe punishments.

• Subordinate and Magistrate Courts:

  • Jurisdiction: Lower-level courts handling minor civil and criminal matters.
  • Powers: Magistrate Courts are categorized into Chief Judicial Magistrate, First-Class Magistrate, and Second-Class Magistrate, each with specific powers for sentencing and case handling.

Admissibility of Evidence in Courts

• Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Governs the rules for admissibility of evidence in Indian courts.
• Types of Evidence Admissible:
  • Oral Evidence: Statements made by witnesses in court, which must be direct.
  • Documentary Evidence: Written or recorded material (documents, digital files) relevant to the case.
  • Material Evidence: Physical objects or exhibits presented in court.
  • Expert Evidence: Opinions provided by experts, such as forensic scientists, which are admissible to aid the court in understanding complex facts.
• Relevance and Competence: For evidence to be admissible, it must be relevant, competent, and comply with established procedures under the Evidence Act.

Definition of Experts

• Expert: Defined under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, an expert is an individual with specialized knowledge, skill, or experience in a specific field such as science, art, trade, or the like. Experts provide their opinion on matters beyond the understanding of laypersons.
• Examples: Forensic scientists, medical practitioners, document examiners, ballistics experts, and fingerprint analysts.

Provisions in Cr.P.C., 1973 & Indian Evidence Act Relating to Experts and Their Reports

• Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act: Allows expert opinions as admissible evidence on matters requiring specialized knowledge (e.g., fingerprints, handwriting, toxicology).
• Sections 293, Cr.P.C. 1973: Enables courts to consider reports from government scientific experts, such as forensic reports, without the need for the expert’s personal appearance unless explicitly required by the court.
• Section 46, Indian Evidence Act: Allows experts to be cross-examined on their opinions, enhancing the credibility and reliability of expert testimony.

Court Procedures Pertaining to Expert Testimony & Witness

• Examination-in-Chief: The expert witness presents findings and opinions in court, explaining how evidence was analyzed and conclusions were reached.
• Cross-Examination: Defense or opposing counsel questions the expert, challenging the methodology, qualifications, and findings to verify credibility.
• Re-Examination: The counsel who called the expert may clarify points questioned during cross-examination.
• Presentation of Expert Reports: Expert reports are presented as written documentation. Courts may accept the report directly under Section 293 Cr.P.C. if it is from a certified government lab or call the expert to testify.
• Reliability of Expert Testimony: Courts assess the reliability of an expert’s opinion based on their qualifications, methodologies, and adherence to standardized procedures.

Organization of Forensic Science Laboratories of Centre and State, NCRB and NICFS.

Central Forensic Science Laboratories (CFSLs)

• Operated by the Government of India under the Directorate of Forensic Science Services, providing expertise in various forensic disciplines to support national investigations.

State Forensic Science Laboratories (FSLs)

• Managed by individual states, assisting local law enforcement agencies.

NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau)

• Collects, compiles, and maintains crime data, supporting data-driven policymaking.
• Works under the Ministry of Home Affairs
• Established in 1986
• NCRB plays a crucial role in modernizing police operations and supporting policymaking by offering reliable crime statistics and insights.

1. Objectives and Functions

• Data Collection and Analysis: Collects crime statistics from all states and union territories, producing annual reports like the Crime in India report.
• Crime and Criminal Tracking Network & Systems (CCTNS): Launched to digitize and connect police stations nationwide, CCTNS facilitates data sharing and efficient case management.
• Integrated Database Systems: NCRB manages databases such as the National Fingerprint Database (Automated Fingerprint Identification System – AFIS) and a central repository for cybercrime data.

2. Key Publications and Reports

• Crime in India: Comprehensive report providing data on crime trends, offenses, conviction rates, and demographics of criminals.
• Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India (ADSI): Annual report covering non-crime fatalities like suicides, road accidents, and natural disasters.
• Prison Statistics India: Offers insights into prison demographics, capacities, and the socio-economic backgrounds of inmates.

3. Technological Initiatives and Training

• National Automated Fingerprint Identification System (NAFIS): A digitized fingerprint database, aiding in identity verification and investigation.
• National Cybercrime Training Centre (NCTC): An online training platform for law enforcement to enhance cybercrime investigation skills.
• Coordination and Capacity-Building: NCRB conducts training sessions for police officers on data management, crime analytics, and cyber forensics.

4. Importance in Law Enforcement and Policy

• Policy Support: Provides data-driven insights for formulating and evaluating crime prevention policies.
• Enhanced Investigation: Facilitates sharing of critical information across states, improving inter-state crime investigation and tracking.
• Public Awareness: NCRB’s reports serve as a reference for researchers, policymakers, and the public, contributing to transparency and awareness about crime trends in India.

NICFS (Now NFSU)

• Trains forensic professionals and conducts research in criminology and forensic sciences.
• Established in 4 January 1972
• 1972-1976 was under BPRD, Later independent department under MHA
• Named as NICFS in 1991, Renamed as LNJN in 2003
• Started teaching courses in 2004

Fundamental Rights: Right of Equality (Articles 14 to 18) 

• Art. 14: Equality before law and equal protection of laws

• State can’t deny to any person right to Equality
• Available to both citizens and foreigners
• Exceptions
  • President, art.361
  • Governor, art.361
  • Foreign diplomats, ambassadors, sovereigns
  • Members of parliament, art.105
  • Members of state legislatures, art.194
  • Implementation of certain DPSP, 31c

• Art. 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of Religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth

• Access to public shops, restaurants, hotels & places of public entertainment
• Use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads & places wholly or partially maintained by gov.
• Exceptions
  • Special provisions for women & children
  • Provisions for advancement of socially & educationally backward classes { 1 C.A.A, 1951 }
  • Provisions for admission of socially & educationally backward classes in educational institution including private { 93 C.A.A, 2004 }

• Art. 16: Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment

• State can prescribe necessary qualifications & recruitment tests
• Posts may reserved for residents of state
• Reservation of seats for backward classes
• Promotion on basis of consequential seniority { 85 C.A.A, 2001 & 77 C.A.A, 1995 }
• Separate vacancy for backlog for backward classes { 81 C.A.A, 2000 }

• Art. 17: Abolition of untouchability

• Prohibition of its practice in any form
• Untouchability (offences) act, 1955
• Civil rights (protection) act, 1976

• Art. 18: Abolition of titles

• Military & academic titles permitted
• Citizens can’t accept foreign titles
• Foreigners can accept after president’s consent

Right of Freedom (Articles 19 to 22) as per the Constitution of India

• Art. 19: Guarantees 6 rights

1. Speech & expression
2. Assemble peacefully without arms
3. Form association, unions & co-operatives{97th C.A.A, 2011}
4. Move freely within territory of india
5. Reside & settle in any part of india
6. Practice any profession or to carry out any occupation, business or trade

• Art. 20: Protection in respect of conviction of offences

• No ex-post facto law
• No double jeopardy
• No self incrimination

• Art. 21: Protection of life and personal liberty

• Right to
  • Live with human dignity
  • Livelihood
  • First aid
  • Free legal aid
  • Against handcuffing
  • Privacy 
  • Travel abroad

• Art. 21 A: Right to education

• Free & compulsory edu.
• Earlier part of DPSP 45
• 6-14 yrs : elementary & primary edu.
• Embedded by 86th C.A.A, 2002
• RTE(Right to education) act, 2009
  • 2005: Bill drafted
  • 2009: Passed
  • 1 April 2010: Enforced
  • 25% quota in private schools for SC/ST/OBC/Disabled

• Art. 22: Protection against arrest & detention

• Preventive detention Act 1953, Repealed in 1969 
• Maintenance of Integral Security Act (MISA) 1971, Repealed in 1978 
• Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA) 1974 
• National Security Act (NASA) 1980
• Prevention of Black Marketing And Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act (PBMSECA) 1980 
• Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) 1985, Repealed in 1995 
• Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPSA) 1988  
• Prevention of Terrorism Act(POTA) 2002, Repealed in 2004

Criminal profiling

It is a method used to predict the characteristics, behavior, and psychological traits of offenders and victims in a crime investigation. It helps investigators narrow down suspects, understand motives, and anticipate possible future actions by analyzing behavior patterns and crime scene details.

Victim Profiling

• Objective: Identifies characteristics, habits, and background of the victim to determine why they were targeted.
• Role in Investigation: Offers insights into the offender’s motive, possible connection to the victim, and risk factors associated with the victim’s lifestyle.
• Information Analyzed: Age, gender, occupation, lifestyle, personal relationships, and any factors that might make the victim vulnerable.

Culprit Profiling

• Objective: Builds a psychological and behavioral profile of the suspect to aid in locating and apprehending them.
• Types of Information Used: Crime scene analysis, modus operandi (method of committing the crime), and potential psychological patterns.
• Behavioral Indicators: Analyzes repetitive behaviors, selection of victim type, and the nature of interaction with the victim to outline personality traits.

Role in Crime Investigation

• Narrowing Down Suspects: Profiles help focus on individuals matching the behavioral and psychological patterns identified.
• Understanding Motive and Intent: Assists investigators in determining the purpose of the crime (e.g., financial gain, revenge, thrill-seeking).
• Anticipating Next Moves: Profiling can predict future actions, especially in cases involving serial crimes, enabling proactive intervention.
• Interdisciplinary Use: Combines psychology, criminology, and forensic science to offer a comprehensive picture aiding law enforcement agencies.

Lie Detection Techniques

• Lie Detection techniques are controversial, unproven, and of questionable accuracy
• On May 5, 2010 the Supreme Court of India in the case of Smt. Selvi vs. State of Karnataka declared 
  • Lie Detection, Narco Analysis & Brain Mapping Unconstitutional
  • It Violates Article 20(3) of Fundamental Rights
  • These techniques requires consent & cannot be conducted forcefully
  • When conducted with consent 
    • Consent should be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate
    • Is regarded as evidence according to Section 27 of IEA
  • Suspects right are mentioned in National Human Rights Commision (NHRC)
• Section 161(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure : Such person shall be bound to answer truly all questions relating to such case put to him by such officer, other than questions the answers to which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or to a penalty or forfeiture.

Lie Detection (Polygraphy)

• Polygraph is a Greek word meaning “many writings”
• AKA –
  • Psycho- Physiological detection of Deception (PDD)
  • Truth verification
  • Detection of truth
• A polygraph is a machine in which the multiple (“poly”) signals from the sensors are recorded on a single strip of moving paper (“graph”).
• Purpose of polygraph
  • event-specific investigation
  • Crime investigation

History

• • 1885 : Cesare Lombroso -recorded suspects’ blood pressure as police questioned them.
  • William Moulton Marston invented a device that measured blood pressure automatically during questioning
  • Vittorio Benussi – focused on breathing, or respiration as Breathing speeds up during stress

• 1921 : John Larson – invented a machine that measured blood pressure, pulse (heartbeat), and respiration

• Leonarde Keeler

• • • improved the polygraph
    • added a third measurement i.e. galvanic skin response (GSR), shows the degree to which a person’s skin conducts electricity.
    • Conductivity depends on the amount of sweat produced by skin

• 1925 : Keeler patents his version of the polygraph

• 1981 : David Lykken develops “guilty knowledge” form of questioning for polygraph tests

Principle

• The interaction of emotions and body when a person tell lies causes certain changes in the body which are both visible and invisible.These changes are measured by lie detection technique.
• Perception or consciously held feelings of guilt produce a defence mechanism toward off the impending punishment of crime.

Working

• Polygraph testing combines interrogation with physiological measurements obtained using the polygraph
• The polygraph relies on measurements of autonomic and somatic activity.
• Steps in polygraph analysis:
  • Setting up the polygraph and preparing the subject being tested
  • Asking questions
  • Profiling the test subject
  • Analyzing and evaluating test data

• Records physiological phenomena—typically
  • respiration
  • heart rate
  • blood pressure
  • electrodermal response (electrical conductance at the skin surface)

• Pneumograph : 

• It’s a corrugated rubber tube 

• • • Tied around the subject’s chest
    • It measures respiratory changes
    • When the chest or abdominal muscles expand, the air inside the tubes is displaced. 
    • In an analog polygraph, the displaced air acts on a bellows, an accordion-like device that contracts when the tubes expand. 
    • This bellows is attached to a mechanical arm, which is connected to an ink-filled pen that makes marks on the scrolling paper when the subject takes a breath. 
    • A digital polygraph also uses the pneumographs, but employs transducers to convert the energy of the displaced air into electronic signals.
  • Sphygmograph :
    • It is an inflated cuff.
    • It’s wrapped around the upper arm.
    • It measures cardiovascular changes.
    • As blood pumps through the arm it makes sound; the changes in pressure caused by the sound displace the air in the tubes, which are connected to a bellows, which moves the pen.

• Electrode : 

• • it is attached to the palm of finger it measures the galvanic skin response
  • Principle : When the device is placed in contact with a person’s fingertips, a speaker, by a drop in its pitch, signals an increase in the skin’s conductivity that can result from the perspiration produced when a lie is told.
• Plethysmograph :
  • It is a transducer.
  • It is attached to the thumb.
  • It measures the blood volume reflecting the pulse rate.
• A polygraph examination includes a series of yes/no questions to which the examinee responds while connected to sensors that transmit data on these physiological phenomena by wire to the instrument, which uses analog or digital technology to record the data
• All the readings are recorded on the polygraph paper collectively known as polygram.

Techniques

During questioning the subject following approach is applied

• Relevant/ irrelevant questions (RIQ)
• Peak of tension technique (POT)
  • Only one pertinent but emotionally charged question is asked
• Control question technique (CQT)
• Miscellaneous technique
  • Multiple general question technique
  • Guilty knowledge test
  • Silent answer technique
  • Asking questions to which subject must lie

Limitations

• Measures changes in blood pressure, breath rate and perspiration rate, but these physiological changes can be triggered by a wide range of emotions.

Narco Analysis

• Term was coined by Horseley & Means “Anaesthesia” or “Torpor”
• Also known as Truth Serum or Drug Hypnosis or Narco Interview technique
• Hypnosis is induced by using Barbiturates or other psychotropic drugs 
• 1st used in 1922, when Robert House, a Texas obstetrician used the drug Scopolamine on two prisoners in America
• Application was first documented by Dr. William Bleckwenn
• Principle : By using imagination a person is able to lie In this test, subject’s imagination is neutralised by making him/her semi-conscious in this state, it becomes difficult to lie and answers would be restricted to facts s/he is already aware of 
• Team of Experts :
  • Clinical Forensic Psychologist
  • Psychiatrist 
  • Physician 
  • Anesthetist 
  • Audio-Videographer 
  • Writer
• Procedure: It includes
  • Pre Test Interview 
  • Pre-Narcotic State Interview 
  • Semi-Narcotic State Interview
  • Post Test Interview
• Drug : 
  • known as ‘truth drug’ or ‘truth serum’ : ethanol, scopolamine, 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate, midazolam, flunitrazepam, sodium thiopental, and amobarbital
  • Sodium Pentothal or Sodium Amytal is given intravenously to induce hypnosis
  • A 5% or 10% solution of drug injected slowly in antecubital vein 
  • As individual’s speech starts slurring interview begins
• Other Methods
  • 0.5 mg scopolamine hydrobromide, subcutaneously, followed by 0.25 mg every 20 min (average 3-6 injections), till proper stage of questioning is reached
  • 100 mg sodium seconal, 15 mg morphine and 0.5 mg of scopolamine hydrobromide may be given
• Wrong dose can result in a person going into a coma, or even death.
• MOA:
  • Sodium Pentothal(thiopental,Thiopentone)is a rapid onset, Short acting barbiturate 
  • Acts on GABA-A Receptor 
  • GABA Receptor are Inhibitory channel & barbiturate enhance inhibitory activity

Brain Mapping

• • Invented by Lawrence Farewell in 1995
  • It is a Lie Detection Technique which uses Electroencephalography(EEG)
  • Detects concealed information stored in the brain by measuring brainwave responses
  • Measures the response to Visual & Auditory Stimulus
    • Stimulus: Thing or Event that evokes specific functional reaction in an Organ or Tissue
  • It measures electrical brainwave responses to words, phrases or pictures presented on a computer screen
  • Uses cognitive brain responses & does not depends on emotions
  • Electroencephalography (EEG) :
    • Measurement of electrical activity produced by brain as recorded from electrodes placed on the scalp
    • 10 -100s of electrodes positioned on different locations of the head
    • EEG signals(in range of mini-volts) are amplified & digitalized after processing

• P300 :

• • Uses brain response to detect brain’s recognition of known information
  • P300 is an event related potentials (ERP) which can be recorded via Electroencephalography (EEG) 
  • Electrical signals known as P300 is emitted approximately 300 milliseconds after it is confronted with the stimulus
• Based on electrical signal known as MERMER (Memory & Encoding Related Multifaceted Electrophalohgraphic Response)
  • Utilizes late Negative Potentials (LNP)
• Brain Signature Profiling (BSP) or Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) is another EEG procedure 
  • Developed in 2003 by CR Mukundan

• Suspect is tested looking at 3 types of information
• ― RED : Target 
  • Information the suspect is expected to know
• ― GREEN : Irrelevant
  • Information not known to suspect
• ― BLUE : Probes
  • Information of Crime that only suspect would know

• It has a record of 100% accuracy