Critical Study on Admissibility of the Expert Evidence in Indian law

ABSTRACT

This paper aims to assess the definition of the ‘Expert Advice’ in The Indian Evidence Act of 1872. In cases involving technicalities in other areas, expert views play a crucial role aside from legal problems. Medical-legal cases are a useful example. This Article is supposed to be twofold. First, the legal structure for expert opinion in India is emphasized, particularly the validity and admissibility of such opinions under Article 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In a variety of important cases, it may also investigate the judicial reaction. Second, it will recognize the lacunas concerning experts’ proofs and recommend specific changes to discourage their misuse.

INTRODUCTION:-

When we encounter something in the world of reality, we believe prominently in what we see instead of what we heard. The courts generally favor evidence taken from primary sources rather than secondary sources when evaluating the evidence. This is centered on the ‘Best Evidence Rule,’ which says that the best evidence is retrieved from a direct source. The Judge’s job is to draw its conclusions on the witness’s evidence and rule on the issue. This principle is to assure that justice is served and that the Judge’s time is not lost either[i]. The ones who record the facts are the witnesses. The word “facts” here implies and includes only facts, Opinions, views, thoughts, and so on that are not included within its scope. It must be understood that the witness must comprehend these details in one of his five senses[ii]. The ‘Expert Opinion’ definition, however, is an exception to this principle. No one is Pansophy.  In such a case, however, it may be that the difficulty applies to the technicalities of other areas outside the Judge’s general knowledge. Although the Judge is ambiguous with that particular area, he cannot draw any conclusions on this matter. Therefore, he should request assistance and ask for his advice from professionals with appropriate technological expertise. Section 45 of the Act[iii] established the process of expert opinion. There are two forms of evidence, namely evidence of facts and evidence of opinion. Expert Evidence is the latter. Medical specialist testimony itself is necessary in cases involving murder.

SCOPE, NATURE, AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT OPINION:-

An opinion is separate from a fact.  In Black’s Law Dictionary, the law of opinion says “an inference or an assumption drawn by a witness of the facts which are known to him and believed by others.[iv] ” In other words, an opinion is the assumption of a party based on a certain amount of facts that cannot be proven, unlike facts.

The following are the criteria for admitting an expert opinion:-

• Without expert advice and opinion, the conflict cannot be settled.
• The fact that the witness is an expert to share his view.

Who’s the Expert?
The meaning of an expert can be taken from the provisions of Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act that ‘Expert’ means a person who has unique expertise, qualifications or experience in either of the following-

• overseas law,
• Science;
• the impression of the finger
• the art of
• handwriting or

And the information has been collected by him

• by practice,
• observations or
• The proper studies.

For E.g., medical officer, chemical analyst, explosives specialist, ballistic Expert, fingerprint expert, etc. There are several more subjects or subject areas where an expert can seek opinion.

An expert testigo is one who has spent time researching a specific branch of education and is thus highly knowledgeable in those fields in which he is asked to share his views. His testimony on these grounds is sufficient for an excellent decision to be drawn by the Court.

Expert’s task:-

• Expert is not a fact witness.
• His evidence is consultative, in essence.
• An expert is depositing and choosing not.
• An expert witness shall present to the Judge the empirical requirements required to evaluate the particular inference.

Expert Opinions Evidence Merit

An expert’s analysis must be substantiating the evidence and circumstances of the case in question. Direct evidence will not prevail if an unchallengeable visual witness or documentary evidence disagrees. Experts are permitted to be observers, but do not presume that they are a judicial officer[v].

Forest Range Officer v. P. Mohammad Ali[vi], held that the Expert’s opinion, was just evidence of opinion. The Expert’s simple opinion cannot outweigh the witness’ affirmative evidence. The opinion of the Expert is not necessarily binding upon the Court.

In Muralila v. State of Madhya Pradesh[vii], the Supreme Court found no reason for restricting the Expert’s opinion to the same class of facts as that of the accomplice and relying on corroboration.

The Court further observed that it would be a great injustice, without substantial corroboration, to base a conviction solely on the opinion of a handwriting expert. An expert deposes rather than decides.

The expert testimony has two aspects—

(a) Data evidence [cannot be dismissed if it is conflicting with oral evidence].

(b) Opinion evidence [is just a conclusion drawn from the facts that do not prioritize actual eye-witness testimony unless the two’s inconsistency is so severe that oral evidence is falsified][viii]. It is a rule of protocol for expert testimony to be corroborated either by strong concrete evidence or circumstantial evidence. It is not safe to rely on this form of proof without finding independent and credible corroboration[ix].

Lacunas in Expert Opinions:-

There are loopholes in India concerning the views of experts. The implementation of Section 45 has different problems and questions, and the Indian legislature has not resolved them. The term “expert” is vague and incomprehensive in compliance with Section 45. In comparison, there are no definitions in Section 45 of the ‘expert opinion.’ It does not include any credentials or criteria for a ‘specially qualified person'(s)[x]. Secondly, the law governing the primacy of eye evidence over expert evidence appears to be misused since an eye-witness can misinterpret an accused in a case. The eye witness will exaggerate the testimony and give the Court a skewed view.[xi] Third, expert judgment is often prejudiced. This can lead to unfair prosecutions. In brief, the Judge’s obligation to seek expert testimony is often assumed. People are uncomfortable with the fact that they can apply expert evidence.[xii] This lack of understanding of the law must be resolved as well, says the government. The legislative body is recommended to draw up some rules about an expert’s credentials and the required protocol.

Conclusions & Proposals:

First, it is a consultative view that is the issue with expert opinions. It’s just substantiation and not definitive. The Facts Act does not have clarification on who should be referred to as a specialist? It just mentions issues on which the Court of Justice may request an opinion. There is still a lack of concept of expert opinion. The evidence Act often fails to mention how the Court wants to guarantee that an expert’s judgment is not skewed or that the Expert is not keen to make the point. Secondly, India’s expert opinion legislation is not complete. This is why the opinion of the experts is viewed as inadequate evidence. The technical qualification was not emphasized sufficiently. The only predominance is granted to knowledge and skill. The legislature must make attempts to create criteria for the Court of Justice’s decision to be based on experts’ judgment. The theory is prominent. Thirdly, as stated earlier, specific changes should be made to the method of providing expert witnesses. The specialist is to be named by the Court or the party to the trial; attention should be granted.

Fourthly, the expert witness in India is not covered and is, in most cases, abused. Steps should be made to ensure that security is offered. The witness, his participation, and his role in the hearings are most significant. Its welfare and family must take precedence. His privacy has to be safeguarded to not impact his life by those who are free to stay anonymous and not comment at the Court of law.

Fifthly, a scientific examination must take on greater weight than a sight testimony because the sighting testimony may have exaggerated evidence and provided the actual event with a distorted version.

Finally, India has a small position for expert witnesses. Experts are only named when the general investigating committee and the Judge have exhausted the other evidence. It is imperative that the country’s forensic science is improved by taking expert advice.

---

[i] In Folkes v. Chadd (1782) 3 Doug K.B. 157, as cited in Tapper, C., 1995. Cross And Tapper On Evidence. 8th ed. London: Butterworths, p.555., Court observed, “if on the proven facts a judge or jury can form their own conclusions without help, then the opinion of an expert is unnecessary and it may waste the court‟s time.”

[ii] Saunak Rajguru, Evidentiary Value of Medical Witness, Volume 1,Lekhoj Research Journal of Law & Socio-Economic Issues, p. 4.,Lekhoj Publications, ISSN: 2456-4524.

[iii] Indian Evidence Act, 1872, § 45, No. 1, Acts of Parliament, 1872 (India).

[iv] Expert opinion, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014).

[v] Charles Dickenson Field , C.D. Field’s Commentary on the Law of Evidence Act , (Delhi Law House, 12th ed. 2011).

[vi] AIR 120 SC l994.

[vii] 1980 SCR (2) 249.

[viii] Arshad v. State of A.P. 1996 CrLJ 2893 (para 34) (AP).

[ix] S.Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P. AIR 1996 SC 2184 (Para27).

[x] Prateek Deol, Section 45 of Law of Evidence and its Lacunas, Legal Service India.(Oct.29, 2020, 9:29 p.m.) http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l45-Law-of-Evidence.html

[xi] M.R. Zafer, Scientific Evidence-Expert Witnesses, Journal of the Indian Law Institute, Pg.53, (56-77) (1972).

[xii] State of H.P v. Jai Lal, (1999) 7 SCC 280.

---

Scope, significance, and objective:-
The present study deals with the Indian Evidence Act’s topic, i.e., Admissibility of the Expert Evidence in Indian law. The Article initially discusses the brief definition of Expert Evidence and also the research questions that are formulated. The current topic of the research is one of the essential developing issues in the Indian Evidence Act. Through the cases which we have mentioned in the research helps us to understand the topic better. After understanding the issue, we could analyze and relate the topic with the general examples we see in our daily lives.

Research Question:-
The following questions have been picked up as research questions in context to the topic of Expert Evidence. These questions will give you a general idea of what is Expert evidence and its pros and cons, and the general topic that we are dealing with in this research.

1. What is Expert Evidence?
2. What is the Scope, Nature, and Admissibility of Expert Evidence?
3. What is the merit of Expert Opinion in Evidence?
4. What are the lacunas in Expert Opinion?
   
   Mode of Citation:-
   A standard model of citation is used, i.e., Bluebook 20 edition.
   

   ---

   By
   

   P. Deepak Bhuvan
   College- Gitam School of Law