Digital evidence has been growing in relevance over the past several years. Most recently, in the ‘Newsclick’ investigation there were several reports of devices of journalists being seized. This raises an important question: can the police under the garb of investigation force one to open their electronic devices. The article argues that the right against self-incrimination protects against such compulsion by demonstrating that unlocking of devices (whether by password or biometrics) amounts to giving testimony. The article goes further to ask what happens in case a person willingly or without compulsion opens their device. The article explores the possibility of tampering of digital evidence and social realities in India to argue that all the contents of one’s device cannot be attributed to a person merely by virtue of being on a person’s device.
Articles
The goal of this article is to ask, how do Courts judge whether or not the methodology through which a piece of evidence is presented is scientific or not (i.e. how does a Court make a determination about the foundational validity of scientific evidence)? What separates something like DNA evidence, in which our judicial system puts such high faith, from narco-analysis, which is generally deemed to be unreliable?
This post analyses the implications of the changes proposed to the provisions pertaining to the admissibility of electronic evidence under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the various modifications in the chapter relating to bail, including the introduction of definition and changes in the scheme of maximum period of detention as an undertrial under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the changes made to the provision on commutation of sentences under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the newly added provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023 that lays down the procedure for filing of mercy petitions by death row prisoners.
This post analyses the insertion of cl. 398 (directing States to frame witness protection schemes) under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
The post analyses the implications of replacing unsound mind with mental illness in provisions pertaining to fitness to stand trial under the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the changes proposed to the collection of forensic evidence and the scope of examining forensic science experts under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the modifications proposed to the provisions pertaining to filing discharge applications and framing of charges under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the proposed modifications in the provision on remand, and discusses the implications of changes in the period and nature of custody.
This post analyses the changes proposed to the proceedings pertaining to taking cognizance under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the changes and insertion of additional procedures pertaining to victimsā rights under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the key changes proposed to the use of audio-video recording during investigation under the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita Bill, 2023.
This post analyses the modifications in the scheme of issuing proclamations, and the implications of introducing the trial in absentia in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
This post examines changes to procedures for the arrest and medical examination of an accused under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
In response to recent trial court proceedings in a case filed by the Delhi Police against members
of a news organisation under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (UAPA), this piece
argues that an accused person has a right under Indian law to obtain a copy of the FIR
registered against her under S. 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). This right
is available at all stages of the criminal procedure, including prior to and during investigation.
Three bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha that sought to repeal and replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.Ā This document is a substantive analysis of theĀ Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and theĀ Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023,Ā which aim to assess major changes being proposed to criminal procedure and evidence as they exist in theĀ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) and theĀ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively. In this substantive analysis of provisions, fourteen issues have been analysed in-depth. Other changes that do not receive a detailed assessment have been identified for the readerās convenience. The document also contains aĀ comparative table towards the end that captures the introduction or modification of timelines through the BNSS for different stages of the criminal procedureĀ under the CrPC.
This article argues that Section 124-A (IPC) constitutes an offence of formal strict liability but fails to satisfy the philosophical justifications of strict criminal liability. It concludes by showing how Section 150 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita Bill rectifies this defect by adding the mens rea element of knowledge or purpose.
This post analyses the implications of the newly-inserted provision criminalising making or publishing āfalse and misleading information jeopardising the sovereignty, unity and integrity of Indiaā.