International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

Digital Forensic Challenges in Scientific Interrogation

Techniques: A Study of NARCO Analysis, Polygraph,
Brain Mapping, and Fingerprint Evidence
Rekha Agarwal1 and Prof. (Dr.) Tufail Ahmad2
1
NIMS School of Law, NIMS University, Jaipur, India
2
Professor and Principal NIMS School of Law, NIMS University, Jaipur, India
Corresponding Author Email Id: [email protected]/[email protected]

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15729417

Abstract

This paper critically examines the intersection of digital forensics and scientific interrogation techniques, with a particular
focus on Narco Analysis, Polygraph Testing, Brain Mapping, and Fingerprint Evidence. These methods, while increasingly
utilized in modern criminal investigations, raise pressing legal, ethical, and technological concerns. As investigative tools,
they aim to supplement traditional evidence-gathering techniques, yet their scientific validity and procedural integrity remain
highly contested within both forensic and legal communities. The study begins with a technological overview of each
technique, identifying how digital advancements have transformed their application and integration into the criminal justice
system. It then delves into the core legal and constitutional challenges, particularly in the Indian context, exploring how
Articles 20(3), 21, and 14 of the Indian Constitution are invoked to protect individual rights against self-incrimination,
uphold bodily autonomy, and ensure equality before the law. They explore the ethical dilemmas these techniques pose, such
as informed consent, psychological harm, and violations of privacy, especially in light of recent developments in
neuroscience and data digitization. The digital forensic aspect is also scrutinized, emphasizing data integrity, cybersecurity
threats, and the urgent need for standardization in the collection, storage, and interpretation of evidence derived from these
technologies. In conclusion, while scientific interrogation techniques offer investigative promise, their application must be
governed by stringent legal and ethical frameworks.

Keywords: Narco-Analysis, Polygraph Test, Brain Mapping, Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS), Fingerprint
Analysis, Digital Forensics.

Introduction
Narco Analysis, Polygraph Tests, Brain Mapping, and Fingerprint Analysis have become prominent aids of investigation and
finding facts in complex criminal cases. forensic techniques, which fall collectively under the generic category of being
technological, operate on a narrow line between law, neuroscience, and forensic science, and have generated immense
controversy regarding their utility, legality, and ethics. As digitization of forensic practices keeps on increasing, digital
forensics is a key tool in verifying the integrity of the proper collection, storage, analysis, and presentation of evidence collected
by these practices. these technologies raise a variety of technical and legal concerns 2. Admissibility of the evidence, violation of
constitutional rights (of the particular Article 20(3) of Indian Constitution), lack of organized mechanisms, and cyber-attacks on
the vital forensic information point towards the need for having a strict regulation. It critically analyzes the digital forensic

1
Corresponding Author: Rekha Agarwal, NIMS School of Law, NIMS University, Jaipur, India, Email Id:
[email protected].

Cite as: Rekha Agarwal and Prof. (Dr.) Tufail Ahmad (2025). Digital Forensic Challenges in Scientific Interrogation
Techniques: A Study of NARCO Analysis, Polygraph, Brain Mapping, and Fingerprint Evidence. International Journal of
Advance Study and Research Work, 8(2), 01-08

2
Sharma, B. R. (2009). Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation and Trials. Universal Law Publishing.

1
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

aspect of the aforementioned four interrogation methods based on scientific acceptability, ethical aspects, and judicial views of
India. It also examines how courts have responded to such evidence and the extent to which they utilize it in a court of law. The
purpose is to balance technological progress and constitutional protection, so justice is dispensed without transgressing on the
rights of the people.

Narco-Analysis, Polygraph, Brain Mapping, and Fingerprint Evidence: A Technological Overview

Narco-Analysis
Narco-analysis is a method where psychotropic drugs, usually barbiturates like sodium pentothal or sodium amytal, are
administered to a subject, rendering him or her semi-conscious or hypnotic in a manner that their ability to lie or distort
information is presumed to be diminished. Under the new mindset, the suspect will spontaneously speak involuntarily and
voluntarily and police turn to him or her, thereby, to unveil repressed or concealed truth deserving of criminal investigation. It is
intentionally brought about whenever regular means of interrogation have been bogged down and crime-tracing units have been
faced with brick walls in obtaining vital clues or determining motive. Though to be a positive influence, the scientific
community is still not an even hundred percent sure Though thought about it’s efficacy. The primary concern lies in the integrity
and sincerity of the testimony after having given truth serums. The second school of thought is that people on these drugs are
most likely to hallucinate, forget things, or even confabulate—accidental making up lies in their memories. Thus, narco-analysis
testimonies and confessions cannot be totally trusted and validated. 3

From a legal standpoint, narco-analysis has faced significant constitutional and human rights challenges, particularly under
Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court of India in
Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010)4 held that the use of narco-analysis without consent is unconstitutional, reinforcing the
importance of voluntariness in forensic procedures. Additionally, concerns over the ethical treatment of suspects and the
potential for coercion or misuse have led many countries to either limit or ban its usage entirely.

Polygraph Tests
The so-called lie detector test, polygraph testing, is the procedure of measuring and graphing one's physiological response (rate
of breathing, perspiring, blood pressure, heart rate, galvanic skin response, etc.) to a series of previously prepared questions and
recording how and when each responds. It uses the belief that dishonest answers stimulate measurable physiological reactions
above an individual's level response. Polygraphs are also routinely given as part of initial hiring investigations or interviews for
jobs that require security clearances like intelligence, law enforcement, and the military-industrial complex. Polygraph testing is
far from flawless, however. The most severe limitation of polygraph testing is probably that it has no method for it to
differentiate among one emotional state and another, e.g., fear, nervousness, or guilt—any or all of which can result from
heightened levels of physiological stimulation. Hence, a naive individual can yield dishonesty by getting nervous, a professional
individual can remain cool, thus producing wrong results. This subjectivity has made differences between the results enormous,
and hence the test cannot be trusted.5

Brain Mapping (BEOS Profiling)

Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) profiling, commonly referred to as brain mapping, is a neuro-psychological
technique that analyzes the electrical activity of the brain using EEG technology to determine whether a person has prior
experiential knowledge of a particular event or stimulus. It functions on the principle that the brain reacts differently to familiar
versus unfamiliar stimuli, and such reactions can be recorded and interpreted using brainwave patterns.6

The forensic science method in its origin and has already been used in several high-priority criminal cases. The technique
includes forcing the subject to hear or receive visual or sound-based inputs about the crime scene and tracks the activity of the
brain and reads accordingly.. But the validity of reading such brain responses into meaningful outcomes is very technical and
relative. Skeptical scientists are certain that brain mapping is empirically not sufficiently based and there's a lot of room for
errors. Mental illness, stress, narcotics, and fatigue will all muddy EEG recordings, so maybe conclusions can't be very specific.
The method is insensitive to victims, criminals, or even witnesses as they can all acquire experiential acquaintance of the fact. It

3
Patra, A. (2016). "Narco Analysis and Indian Legal System." International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 6(4).
4
.AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 1974, 2010 (7) SCC 263
5
Khandelwal, R. (2011). "The Legality of Narco Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping in India." Law Mantra Journal, 2(1).
6
Kumar, R. (2013). "Brain Fingerprinting and Its Legal Admissibility." Indian Bar Review, 40(2).

2
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

thus becomes susceptible to mistakenly interpreting evidence as well as false positives. The court has adjudged forced testing in
such a scenario an insult to man's dignity and the right against self-incrimination. Further, as brain mapping involves reflective
mental information, it faces pointed criticism on the issue of privacy, especially under broad interpretations of constitutional
protection under right to mental privacy.

Fingerprint Analysis
Fingerprint identification has been the stronghold of forensic science based on the principle of one-time occurrence uniqueness
and invariance of the fingerprint of an individual throughout his life. It is a process of selection, comparison, and testing of ridge
patterns on fingers to identify an individual. Previously, it employed ink impression methodology and hand matching, but digital
fingerprint scanning has revolutionized the speed and accuracy in the last decade. Fingerprint evidence is used in huge quantities
in law courts throughout the globe since it is scientifically proven over decades. It is used mainly for criminal investigations to
identify suspects with the crime scene, trace weapons or stolen items. Automated fingerprint systems such as AFIS (Automated
Fingerprint Identification System) have been adopted to transform the process in that they enable police agencies to cross-match
a million fingerprint samples within one second.

But digital fingerprinting also necessitates a set of digital forensic concerns. Fingerprint evidence needs to be properly
gathered—smudging, partials, or cross-contamination taints the integrity. Even the fingerprint information, once digitized, needs
to be properly stored in encrypted databases so that they don't grant access to unauthorized parties, or enable modification or
identity theft. Cyber-attack becomes a nightmare as most of the country's databases are connected to each other to aid crime
identification. A flaw in the system can make sensitive biometric data available to the undeserving, leading to privacy violation
abuse. False positives have also been experienced because of algorithm malfunction or low-quality scans, especially when
processing crime scene latent prints. 7

Problem Statement
The growing reliance on scientific methods of interrogation like narco-analysis, polygraphy, brain mapping, and fingerprinting
creates a three-dimensional interaction of technology, law, and ethics in the criminal justice system. These methods are meant
to help criminal investigations gather information that is reliable, their application has real legal, constitutional, and human
rights consequences. At the heart of the issue is a contravention of the fundamental human rights of an individual, in this
instance primarily the right against self-incrimination (Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution), the right to freedom (Article19),
and the right to equality before the law (Article 14). Secondly, scientific precision and reliability of the methods are at stake,
with concerns for admissibility of such evidence in a court of law. Absurdity of standardized practice and regulation of these
techniques raises concerns of abuse, coercive use, and threats of false confession. Further, digital forensics in the context of
extracting and preserving evidence also suffers from issues related to data integrity, cyber attacks, and vulnerability to digital
tampering. The study centers on critically examining legal, ethical, and technological problems posed by such scientific
interrogation practices in terms of their particular implications for safeguarding the rights of individuals and ensuring
administration of justice in India.

Review of Literature
The scientific inquiry of detective processes such as narco-analysis, polygraphy, brain mapping, and fingerprinting in forensic
science is suggestive of a large literature that surveys their legal, ethical, and scientific implications. The review draws upon
major studies, court cases, and technologies to understand the interplay of sophisticated forensic science with human rights,
particularly as they apply in the Indian setting.

Narco-Analysis and Polygraph Tests

The narco-analysis, although at times yielding valuable information, is not a definite means of determining truth as it can be
manipulated, may be denied under duress, and is open to interpretation. Similarly, Rao (2012) mentions the ethical issue in
compelling such suspects unwillingly to undergo such tests as regarding such methods as generally being contrary to the right
against self-incrimination as enshrined in Indian law. Narco-analysis and polygraph tests have been the focal point of a lot of
controversy in psychological and legal literature. A number of experiments cast grave doubts on their validity.
Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) is a case in hand wherein the Supreme Court of India held that involuntary narco-analysis,
polygraph, and brain mapping tests are against the Constitution except when they are conducted with the voluntary consent of
the subject. The court placed special focus on the fact that such interrogation methods are contrary to the fundamental rights
guaranteed under Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee protection to citizens from coercion and their

7
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Polygraph Test (2000).

3
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

individual freedom and right to privacy. The judgment had a gigantic effect on the legal regime of admissibility of such forensic
evidence before Indian courts. Yadav (2017) discusses post-Selvi case evolution, arguing that although the judgment has
imposed constraints on the use of such a technique, there remains skepticism about their voluntary application in certain cases.

2. Brain Mapping and Ethical Concerns

Pillai (2019) explains the way technology has developed regarding neuroimaging and how technology applies in forensic
criminal investigations. The method has, however, been written off as unreliable and one marred with dubious morals. Brain
mapping, particularly such as the Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS), is also largely explained as the new method
being applied in detecting individuals to lie.

Singh (2018) describes the opposite of brain mapping, that even if it is a more scientific way of testing than the age-old
polygraph test, it is still not empirically tested enough. The ethical concern here is intrusions into privacy because brain mapping
has the ability to reveal information outside of the scope of investigation, and thus it poses critical privacy concerns.

Chakrabarty et al. (2021) are certain that in reality, brain mapping may lead to psychological manipulation because the
subjects have to undergo it at any point when they are not totally sure about what could be the result of the treatment. Apart
from that, the development of brain mapping technology is also questionable when the process is misused within the criminal
justice system.

3. Fingerprint Analysis and Digital Forensics

Khanna & Gupta (2020) establish that fingerprinting in the modern age has brought advanced means of identification but
challenged issues in terms of evidence integrity and authenticity, more visibly for investigation in cybercrime. Fingerprints are
one of the most potent forensic techniques being applied in criminal investigations. With the recent widespread application of
digital technology, challenges about preserving, collection, and processing of digital fingerprints have been posed.

Rana (2021) discusses rising threats of cybersecurity infringement in digital forensics wherein data leakages or manipulation on
the internet could compromise the admissibility of fingerprints as evidence where such are kept and shared electronically.

Kumar et al. (2022) emphasize the need for improved regulation of digital forensic practice on the premise that the absence of
open procedures and standards is bound to produce bizarre results in forensic analysis that can lead to problems in the
authenticity of the resulting evidence generated for use in the courtroom.

4. Legal and Constitutional Challenges

Das & Raghavan (2019) critically analyze the Indian constitutional provisions on the basis of the fact that while forensic
methods like polygraph test and narco-analysis are effective tools, they must be regulated so that there are no intrusions into
fundamental rights. Their article chronicles the judicial precedents, with specific reference to Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010),
wherein the Indian Supreme Court delivered trailblazing decisions concerning the constitutionality of coercive scientific
interrogation. These protections in law, Sarkar (2020) argues, have served to discourage to a large extent the application of such
forensic methods and determine whether or not they comport with the provisions of the constitution. The legal implications of
such forensic methods have been widely debated.

Patel (2021) suggests that comprehensive legislation should be enacted, which would allow for the employment of such
scientific methods in criminal investigations. These include creating standards regarding voluntary administration of tests,
enabling informed consent, and preserving human dignity in the investigation process.

5. Technological Advancements and Legal Reform

Chandra et al. (2020) contend that the advancements greatly overshadowed legal reform, and there has also been a time gap
between the changing forensic practice and stagnant regulatory provisions. They suppose that there is a need for new legislative
frameworks to align with technology as well as ethical issues to safeguard individuals' rights without hampering law
enforcement to use such equipment appropriately. The rapid development of forensic technology, including AI-driven polygraph
equipment and sophisticated neuroimaging, requires a rethinking of current legal frameworks.

4
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

Gupta & Sharma (2023) indicate that India should advance its law with advanced mechanisms for applying digital forensic
methods in criminal investigations. This would mean adopting measures for data integrity, protection against cyberattacks, and
citizens' privacy. Furthermore, developing autonomous regulators to guarantee the application of such technology in criminal
investigations can help balance technological growth and legal safeguards.

Legal and Constitutional Concerns

Right against Self-Incrimination

The right against self-incrimination is a cornerstone of individual liberty in the criminal justice system, enshrined under Article
20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which states that no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself. This right serves as a vital safeguard to ensure that individuals are not coerced into confessing guilt or revealing
incriminating information under pressure, duress, or manipulation. With the advanced forensic techniques like narco-analysis,
polygraph testing, and brain mapping, a key constitutional question arises: do these methods, especially when administered
without voluntary and informed consent, amount to a violation of this fundamental right. 8

Narco-analysis, which involves administering drugs such as sodium pentothal to induce a hypnotic state where the subject
becomes more likely to reveal information, is inherently intrusive. When a suspect is not in full control of their mental faculties,
any disclosures made under such influence may not be voluntary in the true legal sense. Similarly, polygraph tests monitor
physiological changes to detect deception, but these bodily responses can be involuntary and influenced by anxiety or fear,
rather than guilt. Brain mapping (BEOS), which attempts to analyze recognition patterns in the brain to determine whether a
subject has experiential knowledge of a crime, also potentially breaches mental privacy.

The Indian Constitution provides a strong foundation for protecting individual rights, particularly in the context of criminal
investigations where the risk of coercion and abuse is high. One of the most relevant provisions is Article 20(3), which
safeguards the right against self-incrimination. It clearly states that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself. This provision has been instrumental in challenging the legality of involuntary use of narco-analysis,
polygraph tests, and brain mapping. These techniques, which involve probing into a person’s subconscious or physiological
responses, are often criticized for extracting information without voluntary participation, thus violating the principle of
testimonial compulsion.9

Additionally, Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, plays a significant role in
governing the use of these techniques. Judicial interpretations have expanded Article 21 to include the right to privacy, the right
to bodily and mental integrity, and the right against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Techniques like narco-analysis and
brain mapping may infringe upon these rights by interfering with the mental autonomy and psychological well-being of
individuals. The Supreme Court’s recognition of the right to privacy as a fundamental right in justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.)
&Anr .vs. Union of India & Ors (2017)10 further reinforced the need for ensuring informed consent and protecting individuals
from invasive investigative methods that intrude upon their inner consciousness and dignity.

Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws, also comes into play. The arbitrary or
discriminatory application of scientific interrogation techniques—especially when used selectively based on socio-economic
status, caste, or religion—can be challenged as a violation of this constitutional guarantee. In the absence of a uniform legal
framework for the administration of these techniques, there is a high risk of misuse and inequality. For instance, lack of standard
protocols or guidelines may result in different treatment for different individuals, leading to unequal access to justice and legal
safeguards.

Admissibility in Court
The admissibility of evidence obtained through narco-analysis, polygraph, and brain mapping remains a contentious issue in
both Indian and global legal systems. Courts have generally adopted a cautious approach, recognizing the significant scientific,
procedural, and ethical concerns surrounding these methods. In India, evidence is typically governed by theBharatiya Sakshya

8
The Constitution of India – Articles 20(3), 21, and 14.
9
Khandelwal, R. (2011). "The Legality of Narco Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping in India." Law Mantra Journal, 2(1).
10
(2017) 10 SCC 1; AIR 2017 SC 4161

5
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

Adhiniyam 2023,11 which requires that any confession must be voluntary and any scientific evidence must meet the threshold of
reliability, relevance, and objectivity. When forensic technologies fail to demonstrate consistent scientific validity, their
admissibility becomes legally problematic.
Polygraph and narco-analysis results are often excluded from being considered as substantive evidence. Even if administered
with consent, these results are usually treated only as investigative leads and not conclusive proof of guilt or innocence. This is
because physiological or psychological responses can be misleading, affected by stress, mental illness, or the examiner’s
subjective interpretation. Courts also consider whether the administration of such tests respects procedural fairness. the test is
conducted without informed consent or legal safeguards, the evidence obtained can be deemed inadmissible.

There are also procedural flaws associated with the handling and recording of such tests. For example, the way questions are
framed during a polygraph test or the environment in which narco-analysis is conducted can influence outcomes. Additionally,
the lack of standardized protocols across forensic laboratories leads to inconsistent results, which further weakens the
evidentiary value. Therefore, the judiciary often errs on the side of caution, prioritizing constitutional safeguards and human
dignity over unverified scientific tools.

Judicial Precedents
The Indian Supreme Court's path-breaking judgment in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) has to a great extent decided the legal
principles of using narco-analysis, polygraph, and brain mapping for investigation in criminal cases. The issue was a batch of
petitions challenging the tests as unconstitutional, particularly in the absence of voluntary consent of the subject. ThenCourt's
interpretation was that the mandatory testing contravenes Article 20(3) (protection of self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to
life and liberty). The ruling was that no one can be compelled to go through such tests and even if they do voluntarily, their test
results cannot be made known as evidence unless verified by independent facts.

The Selvi decision acknowledged that these practices intrude into a human being's mental privacy and physical integrity, core
elements of human dignity. The Court also had regard to international human rights norms and looked to other democracies,
where some have prohibited or strictly limited the application of such practices to the police. In ensuring that the voluntary
nature of such tests is upheld, the decision laid down a broad principle: all scientific equipment used to lean toward eliciting
confessional evidence will have to face rigorous legal and ethical controls. The verdict has reshaped the criminal investigation
procedure across India at large.

The police cannot carry out such tests on suspects on a routine basis in an automatic manner without the sanction and approval
of courts. Further, the judgment has made lower courts' decisions earlier, upholding to a greater extent the protection of basic
rights despite advancements in evidence. The Selvi case continues to be cited in legal evidence cases to justify the tug-of-war
between proving facts and safeguarding civil liberties.

Digital Forensic Challenges

In the digital age, data integrity has emerged as a cornerstone of forensic credibility. With forensic techniques increasingly
digitized—such as electronic storage of polygraph charts, digital scans of fingerprints, or brainwave data from EEGs during
brain mapping (BEOS)—ensuring that this data remains unaltered and authentic throughout its lifecycle is vital. A single lapse
in the chain of custody can cast doubt on the entire evidentiary value. 12
The BNNS includes provisions for scientific evidence ,particulary in relation to forensic investigations, and brain mapping, for
example, unless EEG data are held securely, minor tampering affects interpretation of wave patterns and could lead to spurious
assumptions about familiarity or guiltiness of a subject. Analogously, storage of digital fingerprints, unless secured, can expose
the data to corruption of files, tampering with metadata, or spoofing attacks. This is something that should be worrisome, as the
mere implication of contamination in the data can render evidence inadmissible within the court, even though it might be
initially effective.

In addition, in offenses where scientific interrogation evidence is questionable to start with, the requirement for tamper-resistant
digital forensic systems is more essential. Strong cryptographic techniques such as digital hashing, blockchain accounting, and
secure audit trails must be incorporated into forensic processes to ensure digital evidence integrity and traceability. Otherwise,
such a default will not only discredit prosecution or defense failure, but also public trust in forensic science.

11
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.2023,W.e.f.1 July 2024
12
Sharma, P. (2020). "Scientific Techniques in Interrogation: A Legal Analysis." Indian Journal of Criminology, 48(2).

6
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

Cyber security Threats

Forensic data digitization is plagued by unparalleled cyber security risk. Narco-analysis reports, polygraph interviews, and EEG
scans of brain maps are generally stored in electronic records of police departments or forensic centers. Unless proper security
measures are implemented, they are the first to be readily hacked, with ransomware, stolen data, or even insider sabotage.
For instance, unauthorized exploration of the brain map information of a criminal can provide criminal memory as well as
violent extraneous mental information, thus violating the right to privacy of the mind. Likewise, computer tampering with a
polygraph test can unjustly implicate innocent parties or exculpate a guilty perpetrator, thus desecrating the entire criminal
justice system.

Other than that, lacking standards for encryption, multi-factor authentication, or not isolating forensic databases from the
external network may render such systems susceptible to being exploited. In high-profile cases, cyber forensic evidence may be
susceptible to being tampered with by not only criminals but also by the media, private businesses, or foreign governments. Due
to that, growing demands for cyber-resilience controls such as penetration testing, endpoint security, encryption standards, and
ongoing threat monitoring have been seen in forensic labs.

Standardization and Regulation

One of the earliest criticisms to be made against the scientific methods of interrogation is that no standardized sets of protocols
and regulatory guidelines are being employed across all. There may be various forensic laboratories, police stations, or
jurisdictional cells having varying standards conducting and examining the tests such as narco-analysis, polygraph, and BEOS.
This lack of uniformity not only results in diversions of legal judgments, but also makes such measures suspicious in terms of
their scientific and procedural correctness.
For example, there is no one "truth" point of detection of polygraph testing, and different polygraph operators employ different
scales, algorithms, or scores. Stimulus presentation variation or wave analysis variation in brain mapping can have huge
influence on conclusions. Non-Standardization lowers the admissibility and acceptability of forensic evidence to the court of
law, where standard procedure and authentication are the rule. In pursuit of this, legal and forensic organizations should
establish national and international standards, come up with certification and training programs, and employ ISO or NIST-
certified forensic protocols. Digital forensic evidence can thus be introduced into the justice system without compromising civil
rights and justice.

Conclusion
The interrogation like narco-analysis, polygraph, brain mapping, and computerized fingerprint identification is a new area in the
contemporary process of investigation. Technology, while it can assist the police organizations to further develop the skill to
detect deception and provide useful information, poses extremely serious legal, ethical, and constitutional issues.

The largest dilemma is how to harmonize these investigative methods with the very essence of justice and human rights in the
Indian Constitution. Articles 20(3), 21, and 14 safeguard a person from self-incrimination, assure freedom for the individual, and
assure equality before the law. These methods can circumvent legislations, especially where there is no informed consent and
established procedure.

Judgements of the courts, and particularly Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), have once more raised hopes of constitutional
protection by limiting the application of coercive scientific techniques. However, even after such judgements, de facto
application of such techniques continues to prevail in routine investigation contexts most often with little apparent legal
precedent. This is to establish a chilling precedent where ease of investigations will take precedence over fundamental liberty.

Also, greater dependency on computer forensic technology increases the difficulty. Computer tampering vulnerability,
information integrity, and computer security call for appropriate certainty that the evidence is genuine and free from
contamination. With emerging epochs, law and ethics which formerly governed it also evolved.

Thus, Indian judicial practice must introduce not only an understanding of a superior model of regulation but also systematic
supervision, moral accountability, and public surveillance of the execution of such procedures. Scientific methods of
interrogative questioning must complement—and not replace—the ideals of a fair trial and respect for human beings. It is only
in the dual system that the criminal justice system will be in a position to use cutting-edge technology without transgressing the
very fundamentals of constitutional democracy.

7
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
 International Journal of Advance Study and Research Work (2581-5997)/ Volume 8/Issue 1/ April-May-June-2025

Author’s Contribution Statement

The author certifies that they contributed to the paper by conceptualizing, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting results, and
preparing a draft manuscript. Both authors have agreed to publish the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1]. Mehrotra, A. (2012). "Use of Technology in Criminal Investigation and Trial: Ethical and Legal Issues." NALSAR Law Review, 7(1).
[2]. Saxena, M. (2018). "The Role of Brain Mapping in the Indian Legal System." Forensic Research International Journal, 6(1).
[3]. Datar, A. (2021). Constitutional Law of India. LexisNexis.
[4]. Kumar, N. (2017). Cyber Law and Forensics in India. Cengage Learning.
[5]. Supreme Court of India. (2023). Annual Judicial Statistics Report.
[6]. Khanna, S. (2020). "Digital Forensics and Criminal Trials: Challenges in India." Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 99.
[7]. Committee on Reforms of Criminal Laws (India), Ministry of Home Affairs (2020).
[8]. Kapoor, R. (2019). "Scientific Evidence and the Indian Evidence Act: The Need for Reform." ILI Law Review, 55(3).
[9]. Blackstone, W. (1769). Commentaries on the Laws of England.
[10]. National Law University, Delhi. (2022). Empirical Study on the Use of Scientific Evidence in Indian Courts.
[11]. European Court of Human Rights – Case of Jalloh v. Germany (2006) ECHR 720.
[12]. The Law Commission of India – 185th Report on DNA Profiling Bill (2004).
[13]. NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau), Forensic Science Statistics Annual Report, 2022.
[14]. Indian Journal of Law and Technology (IJLT).
[15]. Anderson, J. (2014). "Digital Evidence and Computer Crime." Elsevier.
[16]. Mishra, R. (2018). "Narco Analysis and the Right to Silence." Criminal Law Journal, 125(3).
[17]. UN Human Rights Committee. General Comment No. 20 on Article 7, ICCPR.
[18]. Ghosh, M. (2015). "Admissibility of Polygraph Tests in Indian Courts." Eastern Law House Review, 14(2).
[19]. Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), CBI Report (2021).
[20]. Shekhar, H. (2022). "Brain Fingerprinting: Science or Pseudoscience?" Techno Legal Review, 11(4).
[21]. Department of Forensic Medicine, AIIMS – Annual Review 2023.
[22]. Bhardwaj, A. (2016). "Ethics of Brain-Based Lie Detection." Journal of Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine, 38(1).
[23]. Legal Services India (2020). "Narco Analysis and Polygraph Tests: Legal Stand in India."
[24]. Bar Council of India Review – Special Issue on Forensic Law (2021).
[25]. UNESCO Bioethics Committee – Statement on Neuroethics (2019).
[26]. Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) – Guidelines for Biomedical Research on Human Participants (2017).
[27]. The Wire. (2022). "The Legal Battle Over Narco-Analysis in India: Ethics and Evidence."
[28]. LiveLaw. (2023). "Explained: The SC's Stand on Brain Mapping and Polygraph in Criminal Trials."

8
© 2025, IJASRW
https://www.ijasrw.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License