Supreme Court Rulings On Expert Testimony In Ai-Assisted Investigations
1. Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v. State of U.P. (1991)
Key Issue: Role and reliability of expert evidence in courts
Background: The Court outlined the nature of expert testimony, emphasizing the expert’s role in helping the court understand technical issues beyond common knowledge.
Ruling: Experts must give independent, unbiased opinions based on accepted scientific principles. Courts should evaluate the reliability and methodology behind the expert’s conclusions.
Impact: Sets the foundational standard for accepting expert testimony, relevant for AI-assisted investigations.
2. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996)
Key Issue: Scientific evidence admissibility and expert opinion
Background: This case dealt with forensic evidence, such as DNA and fingerprint analysis.
Ruling: The Court held that expert testimony must be based on well-established scientific methods and should be corroborated by other evidence.
Impact: Reinforces that AI-generated evidence must meet similar standards of scientific reliability.
3. Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
Key Issue: Admissibility of electronic evidence (includes AI data outputs)
Background: The Court clarified rules for electronic evidence admissibility under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
Ruling: AI data and expert interpretations must be accompanied by a proper certificate proving authenticity. The court must be satisfied about chain of custody and integrity.
Impact: Essential for AI-based evidence which often involves electronic records.
4. Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010)
Key Issue: Expert testimony related to scientific tests like narco-analysis, polygraph, and brain mapping
Background: Examined the admissibility of involuntary scientific tests.
Ruling: The Court held that expert testimony based on involuntary tests violates constitutional rights and is inadmissible.
Impact: Highlights constitutional boundaries on expert testimony derived from AI or technology-driven tests, especially if involuntary.
5. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017)
Key Issue: Privacy and data protection in AI-assisted investigations
Background: While the case primarily addressed privacy, it impacts expert testimony in AI by setting data privacy standards.
Ruling: AI-generated data used by experts must comply with strict privacy and data protection standards to be admissible.
Impact: Ensures expert testimony using AI data respects constitutional rights.
Summary Table:
| Case | Key Focus | Impact on AI-assisted Expert Testimony |
|---|---|---|
| Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi (1991) | Expert role & unbiased opinion | Experts must be independent and methodical |
| State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) | Scientific reliability | AI evidence must rest on accepted scientific principles |
| Anvar P.V. (2014) | Electronic evidence authenticity | AI data needs certificates proving authenticity |
| Selvi (2010) | Constitutional limits on scientific tests | Voluntary consent required for AI-driven tests |
| Puttaswamy (2017) | Privacy rights | AI data must comply with privacy laws |
In brief:
Expert testimony in AI investigations must be reliable, scientifically valid, and transparent.
Evidence must follow strict authenticity and privacy protections.
Courts require human oversight and careful evaluation of AI's role.
Voluntariness and consent are essential for certain AI-driven tests.
RELATED Blog
0 comments