For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/innovation.php#8

Technological web in the new millennium has engrossed every aspect of human life and perpetration of Crime is no exception to it. Modern day criminals commit crime with use of high-tech gadgets and cyber technology which has humongous impact on society. Per contra, in extant status, it cannot be asserted with vigour that Criminal Investigating systems have comprehensively surmounted the technological advancements while probing criminal cases but sincere endeavours are being put in, in this respect. Since technology assists in commission of crime therefore to eradicate the same technology is equally important. In would not be incorrect to suggest that Cyber Technology and Criminal Investigation have now become two inseparable wheels of a chariot. Word ‘cyber’ means use of or involvement of computer machines or computer networks such as the internet and word ‘Technology’ means use of technical processes or practical knowledge of application in a particular area. On the other hand ‘Criminal Investigation’ means and include diverse steps such as to proceed to spot of crime, to ascertain the facts and circumstances of the case, to discover and arrest suspected offender, to further collect evidence relating to the commission of the offence, to examine various persons including the accused and reduce their statements into writing, to further search places and seize things necessary for the investigation to be proceeded or at the time of trial and to recover material objects or other information from the accused. On most of these events/steps, use of cyber technology and scientific methods aid in a big way for investigating agencies to solve a case and bring truth before the Hon’ble Courts. Therefore use of cyber technology in criminal investigation becomes indispensable. This paper is divided into four segments. The first part of the paper is directed to discern that modern day technology potentially plays a pivotal role in carrying out criminal investigation. In this part cases wherein most relevant and rational cyber technology is used in crime detection is portrayed. The paper has extensively deliberated on four potent tools for carrying out investigation in the millennial status. These four potent tools are (i) modern DNA testing, (ii) phone interception and data analysis, (iii) finger print analysis and (iv) Forensic Odontology. In the second part of this paper cases are discussed wherein sans the use of modern day technology, effective investigation could not be carried out leading to acquittal of culprits. Various pronouncements of Hon’ble Courts have been put-forth wherein lagged attitude of investigating agencies in using cyber technology leading to acquittals of accused persons is highly criticised. Third part of the chapter as tired to showcase that use of electronic means must be adhered in crime investigation mechanism which are enshrined in various provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Apart from the above provisions where use of electronic means in collection of evidence is not expressly mentioned, author humbly suggests that use of electronic means shall be incorporated in the same. This will not only make crime investigation simpler but would also enable Hon’ble Courts to see as to how actually evidence is collected and whether it could be relied upon or not. In culminating part of the paper author has humbly brought to notice various suggestions which would further fasten the process of investigation and emphasized the road ahead in collection of evidence through cyber technology.

For this study William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Govindaraju @ Govinda v. State, Sriramapuram P S And Anr, (2012), M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 1963, Gambhir v. State of Maharashtra, (1982) 2 S.C.C. 351 etc has been reviewed.

1. Effective Criminal Investigation

In India, we practise adversarial criminal law system. In this system the fundamental quest is ascertain truth of facts pleaded in the court. The prime challenge in this system is to prove to the satisfaction of Hon’ble Court the accusations levied on the person facing the trial.[1] The thumb rule applicable in this system is that it is the duty of the prosecutor to prove the prisoner’s guilt.[2] In other words the settled principle of criminal jurisprudence is to the effect that burden of proof lies on the prosecution and it has to prove a charge beyond reasonable doubt.[3] Article 11.1 of the ‘Universal declaration of Human Rights, 1948 states that “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.”[4] Since the burden of proof is always on a prosecutor in criminal trials therefore it is imperative that investigation carried out by police agencies should not leave any gaps/loopholes for criminals to take benefit of and escape the benevolent provisions of law.

It is germane to mention that most fundamental step in criminal investigation is to collect evidence. Mostly in heinous criminal offences evidence is either direct in form of eye witness or indirect in form of circumstantial evidence. As soon as First Information Report is registered with police in a cognizable case, it starts investigation upon it. In cases where direct evidence is available in shape of eye witness. Police records the statement of such eye witness in consonance with provisions of section 161 Cr.P.C. which is annexed with the charge-sheet and submitted in the Hon’ble Court. The predicament comes in cases where direct evidence is not available and police has to establish its case by creating a nexus between the accused and incriminating evidence. Such cases are commonly known as cases of circumstantial evidence. The problem for investigating agencies does not end here as law on circumstantial evidence is not only well settled and unambiguous but also strict in proving guilt of an accused beyond reasonable doubt.

In cases of circumstantial evidence it is said that ‘a man may tell a lie but the circumstances can never.’ Although conviction can be based solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence only in case where evidence is of such a character that it is wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and is consistent only with his guilt. If the circumstances proved in the case are consistent either with the innocence of the accused or with his guilt, then the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.[5] Circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than the guilt of the accused.[6] Therefore while investigating in criminal cases based upon circumstantial evidence, one mistake on the part of investigating agencies could lead to acquittal of a wrongdoer charged with barbaric/heinous offences.[7]         

There is not an iota of doubt that modern and progressive scientific methods are essential for successful criminal investigations. Hon’ble Supreme Court taking note of the same held that greater care and circumspection are needed by the investigating agency. The investigating agencies should evolve new and scientific investigating methods, taking aid of rapid scientific development in the field of investigation. The Hon’ble court went on and further observed that It is also the duty of the State, i.e. Central or State Governments to organise periodical refresher courses for the investigating officers to keep them abreast of the latest scientific development in the art of investigation and the march of law so that the real offender would be brought to book and the innocent would not be exposed to prosecution.[8]

To prove a case of circumstantial evidence that too beyond any shadow of doubt and to bring culprit to books, below mentioned scientific and cyber technology oriented techniques play a pivotal part. These germane tools are (1.1) Modern DNA testing, (1.2) Phone interceptions and Data Analysis via encoding and decoding. (1.3) Finger print Analysis and (1.4) Forensic Odontology which are discoursed one by one.

a.  Modern DNA Testing

Deoxyribonucleic acid, which is found in the chromosomes of the cells of living beings is the blueprint of an individual. DNA decides the characteristics of the person such as the colour of the skin, type of hair, nails and so on. Using this genetic fingerprinting, identification of an individual is done. The identification is hundred per cent precise as opined by experts.[9]  It is the basic genetic material in all human body cells. It is not contained in red blood corpuscles. It is, however, present in white corpuscles. It carries the genetic code. DNA structure determines human character, behaviour and body characteristics.[10]

DNA profiles are encrypted sets of numbers that reflect a person’s DNA makeup which, in forensics, is used to identify human beings. DNA is a complex molecule. It has a double helix structure which can be compared with a twisted rope ‘ladder’.[11]

According to Lord Phillip Justice “Deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, consists of long ribbon-like molecules, the chromosomes, 46 of which lie tightly coiled in nearly every cell of the body. These chromosomes – 23 provided from the mother and 23 from the father at conception, form the genetic blueprint of the body. Different sections of DNA have different identifiable and discrete characteristics. When a criminal leaves a stain of blood or semen at the scene of the crime it may prove possible to extract from that crime stain sufficient sections of DNA to enable a comparison to be made with the same sections extracted from a sample of blood provided by the suspect.”[12]

The process of DNA profiling starts with DNA being extracted from the crime stain and also from a sample taken from the suspect. In each case the DNA is cut into smaller lengths by specific enzymes. The fragments produced are sorted according to size by a process of electrophoresis. This involves placing the fragments in a gel and drawing them electromagnetically along a track through the gel. The fragments with smaller molecular weight travel further than the heavier ones. The pattern thus created is transferred from the gel onto a membrane. Radioactive DNA probes, taken from elsewhere, which bind with the sequences of most interest in the sample DNA are then applied. After the excess of the DNA probe is washed off, an X-ray film is placed over the membrane to record the band pattern. This produces an auto radiograph which can be photographed.[13] When the crime stain DNA and the sample DNA from the suspect have been run in separate tracks through the gel, the resultant auto-radiographs can be compared. The two DNA profiles can then be said either to match or not.[14]

DNA testing is considered to be the most powerful new evidence. Since its first use in criminal investigations in the mid- 1980s, there have been several major advances in DNA technology, culminating in STR (Short Tandem Repeat) technology. It is now often possible to determine whether a biological tissue matches a suspect with near certainty or not. While many criminal trials proceed without any forensic and scientific testing at all, there is no technology comparable to DNA testing for matching tissues when such evidence is at issue.[15]

DNA technology as a part of Forensic Science and scientific discipline not only provides guidance to investigation but also supplies the Court accrued information about the tending features of identification of criminals. The recent advancement in modern biological research has regularized Forensic Science resulting in radical help in the administration of Justice. In our country also like several other developed and developing countries, DNA evidence is being increasingly relied upon by courts.[16] After the amendment in the Criminal Procedure Code by the insertion of Section 53A.[17] DNA profiling has now become a part of the statutory scheme. Section 53A relates to the examination of a person accused of rape by a medical practitioner.[18] Therefore in plethora of cases decided by Hon’ble Apex Court not only the DNA report has been held to be scientifically accurate and an exact science but convictions are also observed by relying on the same.[19]          

The infamous Nithari Case wherein capital punishment was awarded to accused Surindra Koli was also decided by heavily relying upon the DNA test conducted on the body part of deceased girl.[20] In Nirbhaya gang rape case[21], the Hon’ble Apex Court had appreciated and acknowledged the efforts of investigating agencies for bringing conclusive evidence before trial court in shape of DNA reports. Modern technology has a huge part to play in investigation and therefore cannot be negated per se.

b. Cyber Phone Interceptions and Data Analysis

On the out-set it is relevant to mention that a telephone interception can only be done after getting sanction from the Government but in an emergency, interception is permissible with the approval of the immediate superior.[22] A question was raised before Hon’ble Supreme Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties  v. Union of India[23] that whether phone tapping is in contravention to Article 21[24] of the Indian Constitution, 1950. The Hon’ble Court in its verdict directed that order for telephone tapping in terms of Section 5 (2) of the Telegraph Act, 1885. should not be issued except by the Home Secretary of India (Central Government) and Home Secretaries of the State Government. Although phone tapping violates fundamental right to privacy and is in contravention to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as enunciated by a nine Judge Constitution Bench in  K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India[25] but wherein public emergency or interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India is at stake, under those circumstances phone tapping is permissible.

Since telephone tapping is permitted after obtaining requisite sanction, it’s use in detection of crime is quintessential. Generally a mobile phone is tapped through interjection from a software application which enables the investigating agencies to get hold of all the conversations shared by a perpetrator. Network Service Providers maintain CDRs (Call Detail Records) of all the sim cards issued by them. Network Service Providers qua sim card sync the mobile model number along with its IP address. As a sim already contains a micro sensor chip inside it and if the unique identification code of such sensor chip is in the knowledge of investigation agencies then it helps them in tracing a person. Movement of each second of the person traced is ascertained through this cyber technology. The information so obtained is then disseminated in the police control room from where the traced person is digitally monitored.[26]

Use of such cyber technology in collection of electronic evidence is also considered admissible in terms of section 65B[27] of the Evidence Act, 1872. With the advancement of information technology, scientific temper in the individual and at the institutional level is to pervade the methods of investigation. With the increasing impact of technology in everyday life and as a result, the production of electronic evidence in cases has become relevant to establish the guilt of the accused. Electronic documents in strictu sensu are admitted as material evidence.[28]          

Use of cyber technology in production of scientific and electronic evidence in court as contemplated under Section 65B of the Evidence Act is of great help to the investigating agency and also to the prosecution. The relevance of cyber technology in collection of electronic evidence is also evident in the light of Mohd. Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra[29] wherein production of transcripts of internet transactions helped the prosecution case a great deal in proving the guilt of the accused. The  most clinching evidence regarding conspiracy in this case had come from the recordings of intercepted telephone calls between the terrorists and their co-conspirators and collaborators sitting in a foreign land. The phone calls made by the terrorists from Hotel Taj, Nariman House and Hotel Oberoi came to be noticed and were intercepted by a watchful member of the Anti Terrorist Squad. As earlier mentioned, in normal circumstances, a telephone interception can only be done after getting sanction from the Government but in an emergency, interception is permissible with the approval of the immediate superior who, in this case, was the officer in-charge of the ATS. As in this case Late Mr. Hemant Karkare, Special IG, was the chief of the ATS at the relevant time and he was killed by Kasab and Abu Ismail when the two terrorists had snatched a Qualis police vehicle after killing him and two other officers and policemen who were travelling in that vehicle.[30] Following the killing of Mr. Karkare, Mr. Param Bir Singh, Additional Commissioner of Police and Mr. Karkare’s deputy, had assumed charge in his place. Hence, investigating officer had obtained Mr. Param Bir Singh’s written permission for intercepting calls from mobile number found from Kasab and his fellow beings. The permission granted by Param Bir Singh was later accorded post-facto sanction by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Government of Maharashtra. Therefore sanction was duly obtained in consonance with the relevant provision of law.

On the basis of said permission granted for interception, directions were given to the service provider (Bharti Airtel) and to all other service providers, to transfer all calls from the mobile number found in custody of accused to the police landline number. The calls made from or to the aforesaid mobile number were thus diverted with the aid and assistance of cyber technology to the police landline number which was heard on headphones or the speaker of a computer with the help of appropriate software. The ATS office had software called ‘Shogie’ installed in the office computer for that purpose. Penultimately this vital evidence collected via cyber technology along with other evidence and incriminating material brought on record led to capital punishment of Kasab.[31] 

In State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan Guru[32] infamously known as the Parliament Attack Case where five heavily armed persons practically stormed the Parliament House complex and inflicted heavy casualties on the security men on duty. This unprecedented event bewildered the entire nation and sent shock waves across the globe. In the gun battle that lasted for 30 minutes or so, these five terrorists who tried to gain entry into the Parliament when it was in session, were killed. Nine persons including eight security personnel and one gardener succumbed to the bullets of the terrorists and 16 persons including 13 security men received injuries. When the trial was initiated against Afzal Guru and other accused persons the most significant link between the slain terrorists and the masterminds of the attack were established only through phone call transcripts obtained from the mobile service providers. In this case, alike Kasab’s case, nodal officers of cellular service providers namely AIRTEL (Bharti Cellular Limited) and ESSAR Cellphone were called to prove the admissibility of printouts of CDRs (Call Detail Records) whereupon Hon’ble Court was satisfied to conclude that accused persons had played a significant role in commission of most deadly offence against society. Due to use this brunt cyber phone interception in collection of electronic evidence led to imposition of death sentence upon accused persons.

c. Finger Print Analysis

Fingerprint analysis has been used to identify suspects and solve crimes for more than 100 years, and it remains an extremely valuable tool for law enforcement. However with advanced means of cyber technology this method has become much strong tool for crime investigation.[33] One of the most important uses for fingerprints is to help investigators link one crime scene to another involving the same person. No two people have exactly the same fingerprints. Even identical twins, with identical DNA, have different fingerprints.[34] This uniqueness allows fingerprints to be used in all sorts of ways, including for background checks, biometric security, mass disaster identification, and most importantly in criminal investigation.[35]

Kangali Charan’s Case is considered to be the first case wherein fingerprints were used to identify the suspect.  In this case the Central Office of the Bengal Police, took finger impressions of all persons convicted of certain offences are classified and registered, and the impression on the calendar when compared there was found to correspond exactly with the right thumb impression of Kangali Charan, the ex-servant. He in consequence, was arrested in Birbhum, a district some hundreds of miles away, and brought to Calcutta, where his right thumb impression was again taken, and the police in the meantime set about collecting corroborative evidence. The Chemical Examiner to Government certified that the brown marks on the calendar were mammalian blood, the inference being that the actual murderer or some associate had knocked his bloodstained thumb against the calendar when rummaging amongst the papers in the despatch box for the key of the safe. The accused committed to stand trial before a judge, charged with murder and theft, and finally was convicted of having stolen the missing property of the deceased, the learned judge holding that it would be unsafe to convict him of murder as no one had seen the deed committed, but recording their opinion that the charge of theft had been conclusively established against him. This conviction was upheld by the judges of the Supreme Court, to which the case was taken on appeal.

Sir Edward Richard Henry assisted in the detection of this crime, a man was found with his throat cut in a tea garden near where Henry was working. An ex-servant of the deceased was suspected but the police had no evidence against him. Henry examined a book with two bloodstained marks on it and these were identified as the fingerprints of the suspect whose prints were on record. The man was eventually convicted of the offence. Although fingerprints linked Kangali Charan inextricably (inseparably) with the theft and murder of his employer, but the Indian court, evidently wary of power of new technology (i.e. fingerprint evidence), only saw it fit to find him guilty only of theft.[36]

In cases where fingerprints were taken by the fingerprint expert sans the orders of magistrate  but however no prejudice appears to have been caused to accused person under such circumstances the evidence collected in shape of fingerprint would be considered impeccable and admission.[37]

Fingerprint evidence is generally considered to be highly reliable and is particularly accessible to investigating agencies. It is worthwhile to understand as to how fingerprints are found/collection from the crime scene. Our fingers contain rows of sweat pores, and sweat mixed with other body oils and dirt which produces fingerprints on smooth surfaces. Fingerprint experts use powders and chemicals to make such prints visible. The visibility of a set of prints depends on the surface from which they're lifted; however, with the help of cyber enhanced techniques that can extrapolate a complete pattern from mere fragments. Laser technology is highly potent here as it allows to read invisible markings which cannot be read with naked eyes. Fingerprint experts increasingly can retrieve identifiable prints from most surfaces.

The reason as to why fingerprints are considered to the most reliable is because fingerprint evidence rests on two basic principles i.e. (i) A person's ‘friction ridge patterns’ (the swirled skin on their fingertips) don't change over their lifetimes. And (ii) No two people have the same pattern of friction ridges. Even identical twins have different fingerprints.

Police officers use fingerprints to identify accused persons by comparing prints found at a crime scene with prints already taken by them of accused person. In-fact there is inherent tussle between the fingerprint experts with respect to how many points in common are needed to declare a match between two sets of fingerprints. Some experts say and declare that a match based on only 12 points in common would be enough to say that fingerprint has matched, whereas other experts say that up to 20 points in common are required before declaring a match. Although no court has so far being seized of the matter in this respect.

Paul Bergman in his book has disclosed that the age of a set of fingerprints is almost impossible to determine. Therefore, defendants often try to explain away evidence that their fingerprints were found at crime scenes by testifying that they were at the scene and left the prints at a time other than the time of a crime.[38] This in a way becomes an obstacle for prosecuting and investigating agencies to handle. 

The apex Court in Murarilal v. State of M.P.[39]has observed that "the more developed and the more perfect a science, the less the chance of an incorrect opinion and the converse if the science is less developed and imperfect. The science of identification of finger-prints has attained near perfection and the risk of an incorrect opinion is practically non-existent".

d. Forensic Odontology

In the millennial status, a new tool for investigation for investigation is ‘Forensic Odontology’. It is the most potent weapon for accused identification in the armoury of investigating agencies. 

In today’s world, Odontology is a branch of forensic science in which dental knowledge is applied to assist the criminal justice delivery system. S. Keiser-Nielsen, an authority on Forensic Odontology defines the basic concept of Forensic Odontology in the following words:

“Forensic odontology is that branch of odontology which in the interests of justice deals with the proper handling and examination of dental evidence and with the proper evaluation and presentation of dental findings. Only a dentist can handle and examine dental evidence with any degree of accuracy; therefore, this field is above all a dental field.”

Professor Neilsen, elaborating on Forensic Odontology, further states that there are three reasons for considering forensic odontology a well-defined and more or less independent subject:1) it has objectives different from those at which conventional dental education aims; 2) forensic dental work requires investigations and considerations different from those required in ordinary dental practice; and 3) forensic dental reports and statements[40] have to be presented in accordance with certain legal formalities in order to be of value to those requesting aid.

Forensic Odontology is used for identification of accused through his tooth structure. Advanced development of technology such as laser scanning, scanning electron microscopy or cone beam computed tomography in forensic odontology is utilized to identify more details in bite marks and in the individual teeth of the bite. Unlike fingerprints and DNA, bite marks lack the specificity and durability as the human teeth may change over time. However, bite mark evidence has other advantages in the criminal justice system that links a specific individual to the crime or victim. For a bite mark analysis, it must contain abundant information and the tooth that made the mark must be quite distinctive. Bite marks in skin are photographed in cases where the suspect is apprehended. A thorough dental combination is administered after dental examination of the suspect. Final comparison of the details of the original mark with the dentation of the suspect is done by experts. The bite marks generally include only a limited number of teeth. The teeth and oral structure of the accused are examined by experts and, thereafter, bite marks are compared and reports are submitted.[41]

The area of forensic odontology consists of three major fields of activity:1) the examination and evaluation of injuries to teeth, jaws, and oral tissues from various causes: 2) the examination of bite marks with a view to the subsequent elimination or possible identification of a suspect as the originator; and 3) the examination of dental remains (whether fragmentary or complete, and including all types of dental restoration) from unknown persons or bodies for the purpose of identification.”

In one of the most barbaric case that shook the collective conscious of the society also commonly known as Nirbhaya Gang Rape Case[42], the prosecution had relied upon the odontology report, to link the incident with the accused persons. The Odontology report links accused Ram Singh and accused Akshay with the crime in question.

Dr. K.S. Narayan Reddy, in his book, has extensively dealt with human bites, their patterns, the manner in which they should be lifted with a swab and moistened with sterile water and the manner in which such swabs need to be handled is delineated along with their usefulness in identification. It is as follows: “They are useful in identification because the alignment of teeth is peculiar to the individual. Bite marks may be found in materials left at the place of crime e.g., foodstuffs, such as cheese, bread, butter, fruit, or in humans involved in assaults, when either the victim or the accused may show the marks, usually on the hands, fingers, forearms, nose and ears[43].”

After making the aforesaid observations, the author further dwells upon the various methods used for bite mark analysis including the photographic method, which method was also utilized in Nirbhaya Gang Rape Case[44].

The bite mark is fully photographed with two scales at right angle to one another in the horizontal plane. Photographs of the teeth are taken by using special mirrors which allow the inclusion of all the teeth in the upper or lower jaws in one photograph. The photographs of the teeth are matched with photographs or tracings of the teeth. Tracings can be made from positive casts of a bite impression, inking the cutting edges of the front teeth. These are transferred to transparent sheets, and superimposed over the photographs, or a negative photograph of the teeth is superimposed over the positive photograph of the bite. Exclusion is easier than positive matching.

In Nirbhaya’s case the photographs of bite marks taken of different parts of the body of the prosecutrix were examined. The photographs depicted the bite marks on the body of the prosecutrix. The said bite marks found on the body of the victim were compared with the dental models of the suspects. The analysis showed that at least three bite marks were caused by accused Ram Singh, whereas one bite mark has been identified to have been most likely caused by accused Akshay.

Dwelling upon parallel lines Hon’ble Court observed that there is absence of any unexplainable discrepancies between the bite marks on Photograph No. 4 and the biting surfaces of one of the accused person's teeth, namely Ram Singh. Therefore, there is reasonable medical certainty that the teeth on the dental models of the accused person named Ram Singh caused the bite marks visible on Photograph No 4; also the bite marks on Photograph Nos.1 and 2 show some degree of specificity to this accused person's teeth by virtue of a sufficient number of concordant points, including some corresponding unconventional/ individual characteristics. Therefore, the teeth on the dental models of the accused person with the name Ram Singh probably also caused the bite marks visible on Photograph Nos.1 and 2

The Hon’ble Court further observed that the comparison also shows that there is a concordance in terms of general alignment and angulation of the biting surfaces of the teeth of the lower jaw on the dental models of the accused person with the name Akshay and the corresponding bite marks visible on Photograph No.5. In particular, the comparison revealed concordance between the biting surface of the teeth on the lower jaw of the dental models of the accused person with the name Akshay and the bite mark visible on Photograph No.5 in relation to the rotated left first incisor whose mesial surface pointed towards the tongue. Overall, the bite mark shows some degree of specificity to the accused person's teeth by virtue of a number of concordant points, including one corresponding unconventional/ individual characteristic. There is an absence of any unexplainable discrepancies between the bite mark and the biting surfaces of this accused person's teeth. Therefore, the teeth on the dental models of the accused person with the name Akshay probably caused the bite marks visible on Photograph No.5.

Bite marks in skin are photographed in cases where the suspect is apprehended. A thorough dental combination is administered after dental examination of the suspect. Final comparison of the details of the original mark with the dentation of the suspect is done by experts.

The bite marks generally include only a limited number of teeth. The teeth and oral structure of the accused are examined by experts and, thereafter, bite marks are compared and reports are submitted. Forensic Odontology is a science and the most common application of Forensic Odontology is for the purpose of identification of persons from their tooth structure.

Forensic Odontology has established itself as an important and indispensable science in medico-legal matters and expert evidence through various reports which have been utilized by courts in the administration of justice.[45] In Nirbhaya’s Case, the report was wholly credible because of matching of bite marks with the tooth structure of the accused persons and there was no reason to view the same with any suspicion.[46]

Although this feather in form of forensic odontology in the cap of criminal investigation is new and there would be certain eye brows raised by the defence counsels defending the accused persons, but one must not forget the intent with which it is brought into picture and this is to corroborate with other evidence and ensure guilty person is not let scott free. So keeping the same in mind Hon’ble Court should test the veracity of forensic odontology reports on the anvil of Justice.    

2.  Infelicitous Investigation Sans use of Cyber Technology

 It is writ large as well abundantly clear that in cases where investigating teams have hesitated in using modern day technology in investigation of cases, those cases have resulted in miscarriage of Justice. It is the prime of every investigating officer to conduct his/her duties with utmost care and caution as delay or lag on his/her part would bring disrepute to the entire system. Apparently many police officials have took help of scientific techniques and cyber technology to collect evidence but few officials have also shied away from doing the same which resulted in trial getting vitiated.  

In a case before the Hon’ble Apex Court where omission on the part of the investigating officer to send bloodstained earth found at the place of occurrence for chemical examination was considered as vital aspect. The Hon’ble court held that in almost all criminal cases, the bloodstained earth found from the place of occurrence is invariably sent to the Chemical Examiner and his report along with the earth is produced in the Court, and yet this was one exceptional case where this procedure was departed from for reasons best known to the police and prosecution. This neglect on the part of investigating agency to collect the bloodstained earth and send it for chemical examination led to acceptance of defence version. It is well settled that it is not necessary for the defence to prove its case with the same rigour as the prosecution is required to prove its case, and it is sufficient if the defence succeeds in throwing a reasonable doubt on the prosecution case which is sufficient to enable the Court to reject the prosecution version.[47]

In another case where prosecution didn’t take recourse to cyber technology by sending the blood samples to forensic, the Hon’ble Court observed that it in circumstances when the prosecution fails to send the blood-stained material to the chemical examiner a reasonable doubt arises as to the genuineness of the prosecution case in regard to the recovery of such material.[48]

In a rape case where investigating officer is cursory manner conducted the investigation sans use of cyber technology. The Hon’ble Court were constrained to observe that the torn clothes were not recovered by the Investigating Officer and the I.O. did not make any effort to take the semen, blood samples etc. from the appellant which could have given the prosecution an opportunity to obtain medical reports as it was necessary to establish the guilt of accused persons. Further no person was examined from the hotel to identify the accused person or the prosecutrix as the I.O. has only seized the register of the hotel to establish that room No.102 was booked in the name of accused Mussauddin Ahmed and Marzina Begum as husband and wife. Admittedly, the name of the prosecutrix was not Marzina Begum. Therefore, some person from the hotel should have been examined to identify her as well as the appellant.[49] This lagged attitude of police officer coupled with the fact that no witnesses was digitally or otherwise was examined led to acquittal of accused person.[50] 

In another vital case where during investigation, Inspector of Police obtained the call record of the mobile via cyber technology used by deceased, but however, he never placed them on record. Although Trial Court had not considered this aspect of the matter but it was absolutely necessary for highlighting involvement of suspects. In the backdrop due to lack of evidence occurrence of the crime was not held to be complete and thereby accused persons were acquitted.[51]

In a landmark case, it was brought before Hon’ble Supreme Court that that the steel rod which was used to kill deceased was recovered at the instance of accused Prakash which was hidden under a stone slab and it contained blood stains. The Investigating Officer made no effort to ascertain whether the blood stains on the steel rod were those of deceased nor was any effort made to ascertain whether the steel rod contained any fingerprints which matched with those of accused Prakash. This, coupled with the fact that the blood stained crowbar seized at the place of occurrence, was not sent for a chemical examination, raised a grave suspicion that the investigation was not fair and the benefit of this doubt must go to accused Prakash. Hon’ble Supreme Court went on to say that the investigation in the case was very cursory and it appeared as if Investigating Officer had made up his mind that accused Prakash had murdered deceased and the investigation was directed at proving this conclusion rather the other way around with the investigation leading to a conclusion that accused Prakash had murdered deceased. The Hon’ble Court observed that though the murder was committed way back in 1990, scientific methods for investigation were available even at that time but were not used. The Court further expressed its unhappiness on this state of affairs in which investigation was carried out and laid stress on use of cyber technology. Hon’ble Court enshrined that at least from then onwards, the prosecution must lay stress on scientific collection and analysis of evidence, particularly since there are enough methods of arriving at clear conclusions based on evidence gathered.[52]

The Hon’ble Court had once again occasion to hold that due to lack of use of cyber technology by investigating officer the prosecution case could not stand on its own legs as police had miserably failed to prove the authenticity of the cassette as well as the accuracy of the speeches purportedly made by the accused. Admittedly, the prosecution had not led any evidence to prove that the cassette produced on record was a true reproduction of the original speeches by the respondent or his agent. On a careful consideration of the evidence and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble court came to the conclusion that prosecution had failed to prove its case that accused was guilty of indulging in corrupt practices.[53]

After having looked at the poor and in-adequate use of cyber technology in investigation of crime Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case before it observed as under:-

“We are constrained to observe that criminal justice system is not working in our country as it should. The police reforms have not taken place despite directions of this Court in the case of Prakash Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.[54] We do not intend to say anything more in this regard since matter is being dealt with separately by a 3-Judge Bench. The investigators hardly have professional orientation; they do not have modern tools. On many occasions impartial investigation suffers because of political interference. The criminal trials are protracted because of non-appearance of official witnesses on time and the non-availability of the facilities for recording evidence by video conferencing. The public prosecutors have their limitations; the defence lawyers do not make themselves available and the court would be routinely informed about their pre-occupation with other matters; the courts remain over- burdened with the briefs listed on the day and they do not have adequate infrastructure. The adjournments thus become routine; the casualty is justice. It is imperative that the criminal cases relating to offences against the State, corruption, dowry death, domestic violence, sexual assault, financial fraud and cyber crimes are fast tracked and decided in a fixed time frame, preferably, of three years including the appeal provisions.[55] It is high time that immediate and urgent steps are taken in amending the procedural and other laws to achieve the above objectives. We must remember that a strong and efficient criminal justice system is a guarantee to the rule of law and vibrant civil society.”[56]

It is apposite to mention that J.S. Verma committee report on the backdrop of Nirbhaya’s Case had also criticised the working of police officials in collection of evidence at the time of investigation. If police officials would not understand the seriousness of solemn duty casted upon then in prevention of crime and proper investigation of crime then it would give offenders a tool to dilapidate the entire Criminal Justice System.

3. Crime Investigation Mechanism Version 2.0

This part of the chapter is to ensure and to focus as to how the new code or the code 2.0[57] could be functioned in a simpler way so that investigation process becomes easier. Although earlier investigation of crime wasn’t an easy task as a lot of labour had to be ploughed by the police agencies, however with rapid growth in cyber technology, the work of investigating agencies have become much easier. The latest amendments in several provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and other laws coupled with the plethora of pronouncements of Hon’ble Court have aided the investigating agencies to function smoothly. Hon’ble Apex Court has time and again stressed upon use of advanced cyber technology and latest scientific means for criminal investigation. Hereinbelow few fundamental provisions of criminal law are discussed wherein with use of adequate scientific and cyber technology investigation of a criminal case could be made simpler and reach a logical end.     

a. Online Registration of Fir

It is worthwhile to note that whole criminal machinery swings into action right after registration of FIR.[58] It is imperative for a police officer to reduce the complaint in writing so that investigation of cognizable offence could be commence.[59] There no time whatsoever should not be wasted in this regard. In Lalita Kumari v. Union of India[60] Constitutional Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court has emphasized that it is mandatory and not directory for the officer in-charge of the police station to register FIR wherein details of a case disclose commission of a cognizable offence. The intent behind doing so is to enable investigation process to commence so that evidence which could be in perishable form such as blood stains or semen can be persevered and sent for further examination in the Forensic Science Laboratory. Another advantage of prompt registration of FIR is in cases where there is apprehension that accused is trying to flee from country, then he could be arrested sans warrant from the court to bring him/her to books. Although FIR can also be lodged over a mobile phone if detailed and accurate statement is made.[61] Here the role of complaint gains significance. In case if it becomes difficult for complaint to reach police station and report a commission of crime, he/she can narrate the entire story over a telephonic call. The only thing which is to be considered by the complaint is that she/he should provide exact and accurate details and no bald statements should be made. If possible investigating agencies should take help of latest gadgets such as whatsapp audio-video or video calling through skype in order to properly understand and record report of cognizable offence. It is equally pertinent to mention that Delhi Police has opened its website in the name of Shanti Sevi Nyaya so as to enable citizen to report matters online in respect of theft, cyber and economic offences, complaint pertaining to domestic violence, tenancy disputes etc. Few other regions have also started this practise however a lot is still required to be achieved. Presently Science and Technology is in every sphere of life therefore maximum endeavours should be made to in-corporate the same in criminal investigation.

b.  Digital Recording of Statement Of Witnesses

It is to be noted that delay in recording statement of witness in a case could be fatal for prosecution.[62] Therefore sans unnecessarily delay statement of witness should be recorded. Procedure is provided that statement could also be recorded by audio-video electronic means but it is seen that this practise is very rarely brought into action. On parallel lines a division bench of Hon’ble Madrass High Court observed that from past ten years this practise has remained in the books. It is important to put to use audio/video electronic means to record the statements on a regular basis, so that the witness who disowns such a statement can be confronted by showing the audio/video recording and it will help the Court to impeach the credit of the witnesses under Section 155 of the Indian Evidence Act and also to take appropriate action for perjury.[63] If statement is recorded via audio-video electronic means, it could bring exact position before the Hon’ble Court and deter such witness before lying in the court.  Unless an element of deterrence is brought in the minds of witnesses, witnesses turning hostile is only going to continue and acquittals are going to pile up and it will ultimately end up in complete break-down of the Criminal Justice System. Since we are living in era, where the science and cyber technology has grown so much therefore it is imperative that electronic means are used extensively in the investigation and the effectiveness and quality of the investigation is substantially improved.

Likewise, so far as practically possible confessions and statements recorded by magistrate should also be in audio-video electronic means.[64] This would present a clear picture before the Hon’ble Court to arrive at truth in the matter.

c.   Computer Monitorisation of Information Received At The Behest Of Accused

One of the most germane provisions in the Evidence Act, 1872 for collection of evidence is section 27.[65] It is writ large that any statement/confession made by an accused before a police officer is of no use as the same cannot be used as evidence in court. There is a clear embargo in making use of this statement of an accused given to a police officer under Section 25 of the Evidence Act, according to which, no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence and under Section 26 according to which no confession made by any person whilst he is in custody of a police officer unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person. The only exception is given under Section 27 which serves as a proviso to Section 26. Section 27 contemplates that only so much of information whether amounts to confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, in consequence of that information received[66] from a person accused of any offence while in custody of the police can be proved as against the accused.[67] Since section 27 leads to discovery of a fact which could be a vital piece of evidence therefore legislature must propose to record confession via audio-video electronic means so as to reveal truth. The whole process from where confession is made by accused till the actual recovery or discovery of the fact should be video graphed. This would also help Hon’ble Court to know by observing body gestures of accused whether his/her confessions is to be believed or not. This would further enable courts to check the credibility of evidence on the anvil of Justice. 

d.  Dying Declaration Vis-À-Vis Cyber Technology

Another potent evidence which is deduced at the time of investigation is Dying declaration. The law on dying declaration is so strict that solely on the basis of it, a accused can be convicted provided such dying declaration aspires confidence of the court.[68] Even an oral dying declaration can form basis of conviction[69] however investigating team so far as possible should record the same via audio-video electronic means so that screams of the victim reach the court. If investigating agencies are not in a position to record via audio-video electronic means than if possible the same shall be recorded in the smartphone of the investigating officer so that later it would be brought before the court. All possible efforts must be made by investigating agencies in order to bring truth before court. In extant status since everyone carries a smartphone therefore pictures of the crime scene shall be immediately taken by investigating officer and if possible its 3D representation shall also be made with assistance of cyber experts.

[1] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 330 (1765-69). [2] Woolmington v. DPP, AC 462, 481 (1935). [3] Govindaraju @ Govinda v. State, Sriramapuram P S And Anr, (2012) 4 S.C.C. 722. [4] Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence available at: https://notorturetj.org/en/news/everyone-charged-penal-offence-has-right-be-presumed-innocent-until-proved-guilty-according-law (last visited 14 July 2022). [5] M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra, A.I.R. 1963 S.C. 200. [6] Gambhir v. State of Maharashtra, (1982) 2 S.C.C. 351. [7] Azra Moeed, Science Investigation 31(Springer, Singapore, 2015). [8] Kishore Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (1991) 1 S.C.C. 286. [9] Pantangi Balarama Venkata Ganesh; State Through CBI v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2009) 14 S.C.C. 607. [10] Jo-Anne Bright & Michael Coble, Forensic DNA Profiling A Practical Guide to Assigning Likelihood Ratios 16 (Taylor and Francis, United States of America, 2019). [11] Mukesh & Anr v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors, (2017) 6 S.C.C. 1. [12] Regina v. Alan James Doheny & Gary Adams, 1 CriAppR 369 (1997). [13] Admissibility of DNA in Criminal Law System available at: https://thelawbrigade.com/criminal-law/admissibility-of-dna-in-indian-legal-system (last visited 14 July 2022). [14] Supra note 13 at 371. [15] District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District et al. v. William G. Osborne, 557 U.S. 52 (2009). [16] Science of Everyone DNA again available at: https://rudrajyotinathray.com/2017/05/07/science-for-everyone-dna-again (last visited 14 July 2022). [17] Ins. by Act 25 of 2005, § 9 (w.e.f. 23-6-2006) [18] Mukesh & Anr v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors, (2017) 6 S.C.C. 1. [19] Santosh Kumar Singh v. State Through CBI, (2010) 9 S.C.C. 474. Also See Rajkumar v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2014) 5 S.C.C. 353. [20] Surendra Koli v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2011) 4 S.C.C. 80. [21] Supra note 13. [22] § 5. Power for Government to take possession of licensed telegraphs and to order interception of messages- 5(1) On the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of the public safety, the Central Government or a State Government or any officer specially authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or a State Government may, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do, take temporary possession (for so long as the public emergency exists or the interest of the public safety requires the taking of such action) of any telegraph established, maintained or worked by any person licensed under this Act. 5(2). On the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of the public safety, the Central Government or a State Government or any officer specially authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or a State Government may, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct that any message or class of messages to or from any person or class of persons, or relating to any particular subject, brought for transmission by or transmitted or received by any telegraph, shall not be transmitted, or shall be intercepted or detained, or shall be disclosed to the Government making the order or an officer thereof mentioned in the order: Provided that press messages intended to be published in India of correspondents accredited to the Central Government or a State Government shall not be intercepted or detained, unless their transmission has been prohibited under this sub-section. [23] (1997) 1 S.C.C. 301. [24] Art. 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. [25] (2017) 10 S.C.C. 1. [26] United Nations Office of Drug and Crime available at: https://www.unodc.org/documents/organized-crime/Law-Enforcement/Criminal_Intelligence_for_Analysts.pdf (last visited 5 September 2020). [27] § 65B. Admissibility of electronic records - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence of any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein or which direct evidence would be admissible. (2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely :- (a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer during the period over which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer; (b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities; (c) throughout the materiel part of the said period, the computer was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and (d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities. (3) Where over any period, the functions of storing or processing information for the purposes of any activities of any regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by computer, whether- (a) by a combination of computers operating over that period; or (b) by different computers operating in succession over that period; or (c) by different combinations of computers operating in succession over that period; or (d) in any other manner involving the successive operation over that period, in whatever order, of one or more computers and one or more combinations of computers. all the computers used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer; and references in this section to a computer shall be construed accordingly. (4) In any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say,- (a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced; (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer; (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate, and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purpose of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it. (5) For the purposes of this section,- (a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment; (b) whether in the course of activities carried on by any official, information is supplied with a view to its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that computer, shall be taken to be supplied to it in the course of those activities; (c) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment. Explanation.- For the purposes of this section any reference to information being derived from other information shall be a reference to its being derived there from by calculation, comparison or any other process. [28] Tomaso Bruno & Anr v. State Of U.P, (2015) 7 S.C.C. 178. [29] (2012) 9 S.C.C. 1. [30] CCTV Footages are material piece of evidence available at: https://www.tclindia.in/cctv-footages-are-material-piece-of-evidence (last visited 14 July 2022). [31] Supra note 30 at 55. [32] (2005) 11 S.C.C. 600. [33] U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, The Finger Print Sourcebook 3 (National Institute of Justice, United States of America, 2020). [34] Whether pointing out a material object by the accused furnishing the information is a necessary condition of Section 27 of Evidence Act? available at: https://www.lawweb.in/2013/11/leading-case-law-on-recovery-of.html (last visited 14 July 2022). [35] Akanksha Mathur, A Simplified Guide To Fingerprint Analysis 56 (Madhusudan Law College, 2014). [36] Central Finger Print Bureau, Ministry Of Home Affairs, National Crime records Bureau available at: http://ncrb.gov.in/BureauDivisions/CFPB/pdf/Misc/Land%20mark%20cases.pdf (last visited 20 Nov 2019) [37] Sunil @ Balikaran Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh, 2017 Cr.L.J. 1854. [38] Paul Bergman & Sara J. Berman, The Criminal Law Handbook Know Your Rights Survive the System 91 (Springer, United Kingdom, 2018). [39] A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 581 [40]Fingerprint Evidence in Criminal Cases available at: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fingerprint-evidence-what-you-need-29818.html (last visited 14 July 2022). [41] Mukesh & Anr v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors, (2017) 6 S.C.C. 1. [42] Id. at 47 [43] Dr. K.S. Narayan Reddy, Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (Law, Practice and Procedure), 268 (3rd ed. 2010). [44] Supra note 30. [45] Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case: Scientific and forensic evidence sealed the fate of death-row convicts: SC available at: https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-nirbhaya-gangrape-and-murder-case-scientific-and-forensic-evidence-sealed-the-fate-of-death-row-convicts-sc-2428852 (last visited 14 July 2022) [46] Mukesh & Anr v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors, (2017) 6 S.C.C. 1. [47] Lakshmi Singh v. State of Bihar, (1976) 4 S.C.C. 394. [48] State of Uttar Pradesh v. Arun Kumar Gupta, (2003) 2 S.C.C. 202. [49] Mussauddin Ahmed v. State Of Assam, (2009) 14 S.C.C. 541. [50] Id. [51] Wakar Chaudhary v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2016) 5 I.L.R.(H.P.) 1466. [52] Prakash v. State Of Karnataka, (2014) 12 S.C.C. 133. [53] Tukaram S. Dighole v. Manikrao Shivaji Kokate, (2010) 4 S.C.C. 329. [54] (2006) 8 S.C.C. 1. [55]Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code available at: https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/judiciary/Sections-363-366-368-and-376-of-the-Indian-Penal-Code-IPC--2474.asp (last visited 14 July 2022). [56] State of U.P. v. Chhoteylal, (2011) 2 S.C.C. 550. [57] Here the code 2.0 is referred to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as amended by The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018. [58] Code Crim. Proc., § 154 (1973). [59] Apren Joseph v. State of Kerala, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 1. [60] (2014) 2 S.C.C. 1. [61] State of A.P. v. V.V. Panduranga Rao, (2009) 15 S.C.C. 211. [62] Balakrushna Swain v. State Of Orissa, (1971) 3 S.C.C. 192. [63] Meera Emmanuel, Audio/video recording of witness statements should be implemented to deter hostile witnesses: Madras HC seeks views of the Bar, BAR & BENCH https://barandbench.com/audio-video-recording-of-witness-statements-should-be-implemented-to-deter-hostile-witnesses-madras-hc-seeks-views-of-the-bar/. (last visited 21 Nov 2019). [64] Code Crim. Proc., § 164 (1) (1973). [65] § 27. How much of information received from accused may be proved :- Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, are related distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved. [66] Satheesh v. Inspector of Police available at: https://www.legitquest.com/case/satheesh-kumar-v-the-inspector-of-police/1EDF3D (last visited 14 July 2022). [67] Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 S.C.C. 569. [68] State of Maharashtra v. Mehtabi, (1998) 8 S.C.C. 618. [69] Prakash and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (1992) 4 S.C.C. 225.