India
does not have a jury system, the use of the impugned techniques could
impede the fact-finding role of a trial judge. This is a special concern
in our legal system, since the same judge presides over the evidentiary
phase of the trial as well as the guilt phase. The consideration of the
test results or their fruits for the purpose of deciding on their
admissibility could have a prejudicial effect on the judge's mind even
if the same are not eventually admitted as evidence. Furthermore, we
echo the concerns expressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v.
Beland, [1987] 36 C.C.C. (3d) 481, where it was observed that reliance
on scientific techniques could cloud human judgment on account of an
`aura of infallibility'. While judges are expected to be impartial and
objective in their evaluation of evidence, one can never discount the
possibility of undue public pressure in some cases, especially when the
test results appear to be inculpatory. We have already expressed
concerns with situations where media organisations have either
circulated the video-recordings of narcoanalysis interviews or
broadcasted dramatized re-constructions, especially in sensational
criminal cases.
For more information about this case visit at: Legitquest
No comments:
Post a Comment