Published Paper Details:

In contemporary criminal investigations, forensic science has emerged as a crucial component, providing scientific precision, impartiality, and dependability in legal proceedings. This study examines the acceptance of forensic evidence in Indian courts, drawing comparisons with international benchmarks in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia. Despite the widespread use of forensic science in Indian courtrooms, its efficacy is often compromised by the lack of a uniform admissibility framework, inadequate forensic infrastructure, and judicial inconsistencies. A comparative evaluation of global forensic legislation underscores India's requirement for structured forensic reforms. Nations such as the U.S. employ scientific admissibility criteria (Daubert Test), while the U.K. enforces rigorous forensic regulation through autonomous oversight. Germany prioritizes judicial forensic education to ensure scientific accuracy in court rulings, and Australia maintains a nationally certified forensic framework. In contrast, India lacks a National Forensic Science Regulator, standardized forensic protocols, and formal judicial forensic training, resulting in delayed forensic reporting, expert prejudice, and discrepancies in forensic interpretation. This research proposes critical reforms to enhance India's forensic laws, including the creation of a National Forensic Science Regulator, adoption of a scientific admissibility test, standardization of forensic procedures, and expansion of judicial forensic training initiatives. Additionally, progress in AI-driven forensic analysis, digital forensics, and block chain technology offers new avenues for improving forensic accuracy and evidence security. The study concludes that while forensic science in India is progressing, legal modernization, scientific validation, and regulatory supervision are vital for ensuring forensic reliability in courts. Bolstering forensic laws will improve the credibility of forensic evidence, reduce wrongful convictions, and uphold the principles of justice with greater scientific rigor.