This article is written by Khushboo Bharti, an intern under Legal Vidhiya
Abstract
[1]Section 73 of the India Evidence Act 1872 is has been the main piece of legislation in India to spell out on the admissibility, relevance and evaluation of the evidence in the proceeding of the court. As one of the related components of this Act, there is the expert testimony Standard as such testifies plays a very important role of coming up with specialized knowledge which is in most cases beyond the comprehension of the conventional members of society. This article focuses on the legal POSSESSION of the expert’s testimony under the Indian Evidence Act; the place of the expert, the privileges as well as the obligations of the expert, its admissibility, its extent alongside with the problems that surrounds its applicability and reliability. This testimony can range from medicine and engineering , forensic, graphology and even computer forensics. Since growth in the area of science and technology is at a very fast pace many of the challenging cases in the legal sections require professional opinions from specialists. The basic idea of this model lies in the potential to get essential analysis and conclusions to be prepared by other individuals who are unquestionably more qualified in certain questions, this is why it is impossible to solving many trials without forming experts. Thus, in spite of the possibilities of using expertise to assist in judging within the guidelines of the judicial procedure there exist certain issues. The issues of expertise, methods, and impartiality are the main topics that should be addressed in further discussions to ensure the dependability of experts. The legal provisions relative to the authorities holding the expert opinion and that has been accredited in Indian courts stems from the Indian Evidence Act particularly Sections 45 – 51. It shall be legal for an opinion as to be given in the aspects of terms of point of foreign law, science, art or identification of handwriting or finger impressions only when such opinions are given by the persons who are particularly qualified in the given subjects according to the Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Keywords
Indian Evidence Act, Expert testimony, Legal framework, Admissibility of evidence, Specialized knowledge, Forensic science, Judicial process, Expert opinion credibility , Qualifications of experts , Case laws , Cross-examination ,Scientific validity, Judicial education ,Legal scrutiny
Introduction [2]
Under the Indian legal system The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is one of the main Act which determines powers of court regarding matters of admissibility of evidence, what evidence is relevant and what is irrelevant and how the collected evidence is to be evaluated. Among the outstanding securities of this Act is the rules surrounding expert’s evidence as provided in sections 45 to 51. It is an opinion from a professional, such as the doctor’s findings or an engineer’s conclusions, or from anyone who, due to the knowledge and experience they have to acquire in a job that the ordinary person doesn’t, form an opinion on the matter in issue. The purpose of these specialists is also to help courts to have a right understanding of certain aspects that are technical or specialized therefore enabling the court to arrive at the right facts.
It’s noteworthy that expertise can be of medical, engineering, legal, handwriting, and digital, as well as several others. Expert evidence has become a part of the modern legal process, due to reliance on science and technology as a source of legal proofs, and being a crucial part of a trial’s proceedings. But issues relating to the admissibility and assessment of such proof raises its own problems like whether the expert is qualified to give such evidence, the standard employed in the expert’s discipline, and whether or not the opinion proffered is impartial. In this article, an attempt will be made to discuss these dimensions, thus providing a detailed overview of how and through which provisions expert testimony is incorporated into the Indian system of law based on the Indian Evidence Act.
The major concerns in the context of expert evidence are admissibility of the expert and the credibility of the expert. There are doctrines and rules regarding the admissibility of expert evidence as formulated by the judiciary and the key to them has been set thus in that the admissibility of any expert evidence has to be subjected to rigorous assessment of the relevance and reliability of the science supporting such opinions. Judicial edutainment: Hence, it is necessary to update the approaches to dealing with the experts and the constitutive science basics from time to time for the judges. The analysis of an expert’s credibility can often be based on his education, level of training and experience, prior work and practical experience in the relevant field. Experts, therefore, are constrained with various obligations as pertaining to rendering an opinion on issues under consideration as an expert witness, providing witness to the facts and circumstances related to the case, besides engaging scientifically established approaches; and presenting opinion and findings in such a way that they are easily understandable by the court. It is imperative that specialist then avoids large technical discourses that are inclusive of mechanisms for stating the principles of a specialist while reducing the guarantees in a way that the judges and juries understand.
All in all, expert opinions are helpful and valuable, although they are ridden with certain limitations that must be accepted by the courts. It is obvious that at most, it can serve as another source of information, which can quickly overshadow all the other important aspects of the case; the quality of the stories that the experts tell, as well as the indicators of their credibility, can be quite varied as well. Given that the experts are assumed or indeed possibly biased towards the employing party and depending on the degree of this allegiance, the reports produced by the experts may contain mostly favorable information for the side sponsoring them, one has to make sure that cross-examination and evaluation of the qualifying background, methods, and findings of the expert becomes crucial.
Legal Foundation of Expert Testimony[3]
The legal basis for the admissibility of expert testimony in India is mainly based on section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act which stated that if the court requires opinion on the question of the foreign law, scientifically, in art or in matters of handwriting or finger impression specialist opinion of a person is taken into consideration. This provision is very relevant since it recognizes that the judiciary lacks expertise in certain matters and offers a legal framework for admitting the outside opinion into the court system. Apart from it, the Sections 46 to 51 are also developed to provide more details about the provisions of Section 45 on the issues of expert evidence. The topic of this section is relevant in circumstances where the facts proved are favorable or unfavorable to the opinions of such specialists, stressing the need for substantiation. Section 47 deals with persons who express beliefs on issues related to handwriting while section 48 refers to the opinions of persons who can offer customary practices, formally known as lay opinions Further, there is a show of distinction in admissibility of experiential opinions as against the specialized opinion. Concerning the second proposition, see Section 49 which deals with authorities on the usage and the doctrine of any body of men or family, and as to the third proposition, Section 50 deals with the authority of opinions which arise when the court has to form an opinion concerning the existence of the relationships. That is why these provisions are integrated into the Act, which comprehensively addresses the issue of expert testimonies while emphasizing that they should be relevant and supported by other evidence. This legal framework is intended to achieve an equilibrium between admissibility of experts’ opinions and the desirability of the quanta of proof in judicial decisions, which is a goal of the Act as a whole, with an emphasis on the delivery of justice based on sound principles of evidence. Qualification and Roles of experts The qualifications of an expert, as suggested by the Indian evidence Act, are not bounded in legal maxims but are decided according to the standard and is synonymous with a professional who has a specific expertise in his or her line of profession. The criteria normally used by the courts in determining the expertise of an expert may include education, training in the field, experience in field and previous work carried out in the same field. For example, a forensic specialist will be considered an expert in examining samples collected from scenes of crimes under the jury’s permission while a qualified medical person with years of work experience in a given field will be considered an expert in medical witness.
Experts’ obligations are diverse and significant in maintaining the high standards of the judicial system. First of all, opinions of experts should be unbiased having no desire and no personal interest in the results of the experiment. Their mandate is to support the court in enlightening it on various matters more especially technical issues and not to support any party to the case. This means that such independent experts must be very professional and ethical in their conduct since any evidence from them can be tainted by their bias. Secondly, as spokespeople for their fields, experts are forecasted to employ scientifically proven methods and principles in their procedures and thereby continue to support every opinion given by them with sound scientific theories and methods that are valid and reliable. In fields such as forensic science it is especially critical since the approach employed has to be fully over examinable.
Furthermore, there are certain expectations that are put on experts where they are expected to have the ability to explain results and opinions of a case in simple terms that a court can understand and not complicate the matter with terms that may not be understood by the latter. They have to be able to describe their procedures, the premises that were used to derive conclusions, and the meaning of the results that were achieved in a way that is easily understandable by the judge or the jury who may, at times, lack the specialized knowledge in the given field. Such a presentation makes it easier for the court to understand issues demonstrated by the expert witness when presenting his or her testimony.
Some of the Ways in Which it Worked out Include; Scope and Limitations of Expert Testimony
[4]Thus, although expert analysis is particularly useful in various circumstances, it is not devoid of some restrictions that need to be take into account by the courts. A notable weakness would be the possible reliance on the expert opinion to the disregard of other essential forms of evidence. They must bear in mind that expert opinion should be tested together with other pieces of tender in the trial process, and not be given considerations with authority because of the person who offered the opinion in the first place.
Another issue specific to this kind of research is the inconsistency in the credibility of experts and the quality of their testimonies. It should also be pointed out that various experts differ in their level of knowledge, as well as in the approaches followed as well as judgments made. This Lithium competition model also means that specialists acting for different sides are likely to disagree, such that the court has to decide whom to believe. This means that the judges have to have some level of appreciation and knowledge of matters that are before them especially when dealing with specialized or technical issues.
However, its weaknesses cannot be ignored, for example, the possibilities of bias in the expert testimonies. Consultants summoned by one of the parties of a case may give evidence that is either deliberately or inadvertently biased in their client’s favor. This issue of bias means that there should be intensive cross-examination and close scrutiny of the expert’s background, techniques as well as findings. Courts have to be cautious while assessing the relevance and credibility of expert opinion with regard to its bias towards any party or not beneficial for the case.
Challenges and Solutions
[5]The two critical issues concerning the expert evidence under the Indian Evidence Act are admissibility and reliability of the evidence. The foundation of the expert testimony primarily is pegged on the L et. Al. , wherein the court determines the credibility of the expert and the connection between the expertise and the case. However, identifying such factors can be disputable, particularly, when the issues related to modern scientific advancements are considered, and it will be challenging to determine who is a specialist in certain themes.
In order to meet these challenges the judiciary has come up with some principles and tests to for assessing experts’ opinions. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its some of the historical decisions has stressed upon the necessity of scrutinizing the probative value of expert evidence scientifically. For example, the court has emphasized the so-called Daubert standard, which implies such questions as whether the expert has applied the methods that could pass a peer review, and whether the conclusions have been based on reliable principles and methods.
Furthermore, the spiraling times of complexity of the cases especially those that deal with various technologies and scientific procedures make judicial education and training essential. I believe that judges should be educated on appropriate standards of reviewing expert opinions and the principles of the given field. Specific educational DLEs and other materials can be helpful for sharpening judges’ critical thinking skills regarding the admissibility of expert testimony.
Case Laws
In Keshoram Bora and Anr v. State of Assam [6]
Supreme Court of India laid down the principles relating to the admissibility of the expert opinion in all cases where the existence of an expert is recognized for the purpose of establishing specialized knowledge. This was focused on the admissibility of expert opinions within a case especially medical opinions on the cause of death. The court noted that the credibility of expert testimony has to be properly scrutinized and its analytical results should be cross-checked with other evidence. It pointed out that expert opinions are always useful in a trial but they cannot be taken at face value. This case paved the way to how judicious expert evidence can be used in the Indian legal system.
State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdeo Singh, 1993 SCC (3) 254 : 1992 (2) SCALE 547 [7]
Even in the case relating to State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdeo Singh the courts had to deal with the ballistic experts where evidence was sought to be made where bullets found on the crime scene bearing relation to the weapons alleged to have been used by the accused was required to be established. The court lucidly opined that the opinion of the ballistic expert was highly essential in linking the accused with the crime. This case also demonstrated the value of the expert opinions in forensic science as one of the methods to advance facts which cannot be explained under certain set of sophisticated circumstances to persons of a common understanding. The ruling also supported the admissibility of opinions of specialists in criminal matters in the correct evaluation of cases and their resolution.
[8]Ram Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1973.
The case that was brought before the Supreme Court in Ram Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh pertains to the legal standing as well as the reliability of handwriting analysis professionals. The focus of the case was the cause of concern in relation to signatures that were at the of controversy in the different documents. Hence, the court remarked that the opinion of handwriting experts can be introduced in court as evidence but it cannot be the sole basis for a conviction since it needs supporting grounds. This case demonstrated how the rules on the admissibility of expert opinion and professional evidence may be exploited and how minimal regard is offered by judges, lawyers, and members of the jury to judges’ role of filtering such evidence and avoiding being influenced by one person, who claims to have considerable knowledge of a given matter and will therefore usually be accepted by the tribunal.
Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta: AIR 1983 SC 1292[9]
As far as the position of the expert evidence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with educational matters in Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta. The case was spurring the examination of papers by means of an expert committee. The court stated that findings of the expert committee were decisive of fairness and accuracy of assessment directed by the examination. This case clearly analyzed how meaningful damages claims can be in non-criminal spheres, mostly important areas of practices such as education where expert proofs are useful and provide vital evidence that is crucial for the trial.
Bhagirath Case has State of Haryana v. Bhagirath 1999[10]
In the case of State of Haryana v. Bhagirath, the medical opinion concerning the cause and nature of injuries caused to the victim were considered by the Court. The highest court also pointed out the necessity to exclude the pure rhetoric of the expert and the actual opinions and conclusions that are to be grounded in objective assessment and a set of scientific approaches. The court emphasized the roles played by the professionals to offer data independent besides stressing on the obligation of the tribunal to assess medical evidence jointly with other data mauled during the trial. This ruling gave emphasis on the preservation of bias and neutrality of the expert witnesses in medical and forensic practices.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 113 S. Ct. 2786, 1993[11].
While this was not an Indian case, it has been referred to world over, especially in the United States to establish a criterion of expert testimony as in the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals was used by the U. S. Supreme Court to set up the Daubert standard where factors that define the admissibility of the expert opinion include the reliability and the relevancy of the principles and methods used by the expert. Most importantly, the trending Daubert standard has been used by the Indian courts to make known the principles of scientific reliability and the peer review when dissecting out expert counsel. This case establishes why there are stringent requirements for admitting and evaluating out-of-Experts –the tradition, as they say, is to apply a filter to such witnesses.
Selvi and Anr. In A. K. Blverse Rice Mill v. State of Karnataka, (2010)
Discussions regarding the scientific debate coupled with the controversy of the quantity of scientific techniques such as polygraphy, narco analysis, and brain mapping has been explained in the Selvi v. State of Karnataka case. The court concluded these tests stating that these tests which indicate the degrees of identification and assessment cannot be administered with the permission of the accused. As anticipated, a considerable amount of time was devoted to the issue of paying respect to the owner of the rights to the person and the ethical issue pertaining to the scientific and expert findings. This case relates to the balance to be struck of matters between the incorporation of the highest standards of scientific research and the certified and rightful legal and ethical processes of justice administration.
Conclusion [12]
It is an established necessity for the Indian judicial system as it offers the required and specialized input for proposing a correct and just decision on the cases. Thus, the Indian Evidence Act, by its provisions, aims at admitting the expert opinions into the process of legal trial and estimating their credibility and significance. Nonetheless, the problematic concerning admissibility, reliability, and bias of experts’ opinions provokes the necessity to improve the legal standards and judicial practices’ experience constantly.
In the ever-evolving sectors of science and technology, expert opinions are expected to be sought more frequently, and thus, it is necessary for the legal system to evolve and enhance its practice concerning the evaluation and utilization of expert evidence. Thus, through the adoption of a stringent admissibility criteria forcing TCCA 2018 to reconsider a shift in the criteria for admitting expert opinions, supporting the judicial education program, and encouraging the ES as the gatekeeper to uphold ethical standards, the Indian judicial system can channel an opportune message towards reformulating a strong purpose of expert testimony in achieving justice and guaranteeing genuine outcomes.
The present work is a vast analysis of the concept of expert testimony in light of the Indian Evidence Act, and it underlines the necessity of safeguarding the conjunction of specific domain expertise and critical legal appraisal so that expertise befits the cause of justice.
Thus, focusing on the Indian criminal justice’s approach to evidence, the most relevant Act in our case is the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. Regarding the type of sources of evidence, providing that expert evidence is currently most important, the intention is explain professional opinions on specific issues, which cannot be familiar to every person. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Act, expert evidence is used under the conditions in an attempt to present opinions based on the special knowledge of the expert who is a witness in scientific, artistic, handwriting and foreign law issues. The approach that the judiciary has employed in the evaluation of the competence of the expert in respect to the accreditation and perception towards the expert was all along centered on the issue of admissibility of the testimony, and the reliability along with the whole process of evaluation of the expert. A few of them have demonstrated the capacity of the judiciary as the watchdog that oversees the processes of admitting scientifically genuine evidence that is affirmed by professional experts. Such examples like the ones, which illustrate use of forensic evidence and the presence of contradictory positions of experts, show that more careful consideration of the problem is required to maintain the admissibility of the expert information. Nevertheless, there are some issues and shortcomings as far as the use of expert testifies is concerned. Difficulties such as prejudice, complications, paradoxes, non- uniformity, limitations, and instability of knowledge, affect the effectiveness of an expert witness. It implies a coordinated solution that must be complemented by a better assessment of the reliability of the specialists, offers tools for sharing complex data with residents, and resolving disputes between them. Hence, prospective changes need to improve the efficiency of expert testimony, with the difficulties determined. Increasing the Accreditations and overseeing the proficiency, skill, and educational background of the expert especially the judges and lawyers and going further encouraging the utilization of the panels of the expert is one of the crucial steps to be implemented in order to improve the reliability and impartiality of the expert opinion.
References
- Expert Evidence-Manupatrahttp://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/68598D7D-344C-41C5-9FFD-89CE870BB3BB.pdf Visited on 2/08/2024
- Expert Opinion under Indian Evidence Acthttps://www.lawctopus.com/clatalogue/clat-pg/expert-opinion-under-indian-evidence-act/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- Expert Opinion under Indian Evidence Act, 1872 https://lawbhoomi.com/expert-opinion-under-indian-evidence-act-1872/#:~:text=Section%2045%20of%20the%20Indian%20Evidence%20Act%2C%201872%2C%20delineates%20the,understanding%20of%20the%20average%20person.Visited on 2/08/2024
- Experts under The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 https://lawbhoomi.com/expert-opinion-under-indian-evidence-act-1872/#:~:text=Limitations%20of%20Expert%20Opinions,-Despite%20their%20value&text=Experts%20provide%20interpretations%20based%20on,without%20considering%20other%20substantive%20evidence.Visited on 2/08/2024
- Expert witnesses under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 https://blog.ipleaders.in/expert-witnesses-under-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- Keshoram Bora and Anr v. State of Assam (1978). https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1839895/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdeo Singh, 1993 SCC (3) 254 : 1992 (2) SCALE 547 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1824507/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- Ram Narain vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 5 April, 1973 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1536178/#:~:text=The%20appellant%2C%20Ram%20Narain’s%20conviction,of%20those%20letters%2C%20Shri%20R.%20A. Visited on 2/08/2024
- Kanpur University And Others vs Samir Gupta And Others on 27 September, 1983https://indiankanoon.org/doc/470507/Visited on 2/08/2024
- State Of Haryana vs Bhagirath And Others on 12 May, 1999https://indiankanoon.org/doc/720083/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 113 S. Ct. 2786, 1993https://indiankanoon.org/doc/720083/ Visited on 2/08/2024
- Expert Opinion And It’s Relevancy Under Indian Evidence Act,1872 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7011-expert-opinion-and-it-s-relevancy-under-indian-evidence-act-1872.html#google_vignette Visited on 2/08/2024
[1] Expert Evidence-Manupatrahttp://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/68598D7D-344C-41C5-9FFD-89CE870BB3BB.pdf Visited on 2/08/2024
[2] Expert Opinion under Indian Evidence Act https://www.lawctopus.com/clatalogue/clat-pg/expert-opinion-under-indian-evidence-act/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[3] Expert Opinion under Indian Evidence Act, 1872
[4] Experts under The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 https://lawbhoomi.com/expert-opinion-under-indian-evidence-act-1872/#:~:text=Limitations%20of%20Expert%20Opinions,-Despite%20their%20value&text=Experts%20provide%20interpretations%20based%20on,without%20considering%20other%20substantive%20evidence.Visited on 2/08/2024
[5] Expert witnesses under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 https://blog.ipleaders.in/expert-witnesses-under-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[6] Keshoram Bora and Anr v. State of Assam (1978). https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1839895/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[7] State of Maharashtra v. Sukhdeo Singh, 1993 SCC (3) 254 : 1992 (2) SCALE 547 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1824507/Visited on 2/08/2024
[8] Ram Narain vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 5 April 1973 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1536178/#:~:text=The%20appellant%2C%20Ram%20Narain’s%20conviction,of%20those%20letters%2C%20Shri%20R.%20A.Visited on 2/08/2024
[9] Kanpur University And Others vs Samir Gupta And Others on 27 September, 1983https://indiankanoon.org/doc/470507/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[10] State Of Haryana vs Bhagirath And Others on 12 May, 1999https://indiankanoon.org/doc/720083/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[11] Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 113 S. Ct. 2786, 1993https://indiankanoon.org/doc/720083/ Visited on 2/08/2024
[12] Expert Opinion And It’s Relevancy Under Indian Evidence Act,1872 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7011-expert-opinion-and-it-s-relevancy-under-indian-evidence-act-1872.html#google_vignette Visited on 2/08/2024
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.
