Discuss the role of forensic science institutions like NFSU in ensuring justice in complex criminal and constitutional cases. What safeguards are needed to prevent selective evidence submission?

Q. Discuss the role of forensic science institutions like NFSU in ensuring justice in complex criminal and constitutional cases. What safeguards are needed to prevent selective evidence submission? (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Forensic institutions convert contested allegations into scientifically testable evidence. The National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU), declared an institution of national importance under the NFSU Act, 2020 [2], illustrates both this promise and the procedural vulnerabilities that can blunt it.

Role in ensuring justice - Scientific corroboration: voice spectrography, digital authentication and tampering detection supply objective proof where oral testimony is unreliable — as in the Supreme Court's direction that the entire audio clip allegedly linking Manipur's former Chief Minister to the 2023 ethnic violence be examined by NFSU [1]. - Statutory push: the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 makes forensic expert visits and videography of evidence collection mandatory for offences punishable with seven years or more [4], shifting investigation from confession-centric to science-centric. - Constitutional cases: neutral expert findings let courts test executive claims under Articles 32 and 142 without depending solely on the investigating agency's version [1]. - Capacity building: the National Forensic Infrastructure Enhancement Scheme (2024), with ₹2,254.43 crore for nine NFSU off-campuses and seven CFSLs, targets manpower shortage and laboratory pendency [3].

Limits exposed A laboratory's report is only as reliable as the material placed before it. In the Manipur case, forwarding only select clippings produced a near-clean chit, obliging the Court to order re-examination of the complete recording [1].

Safeguards needed - Mandatory certificate of completeness and chain of custody, with hash-verified original media, from the submitting agency. - Disclosure to the affected party of exactly what was referred; sealed-cover use kept exceptional, consistent with Madhyamam Broadcasting (2023) deprecating non-disclosure [5]. - Functional autonomy and accreditation audits for forensic labs, insulating them from the investigating executive. - Court-monitored referral and time-bound reporting in constitutionally sensitive matters.

Forensic science strengthens justice only when the evidence chain is complete and transparent. Institutionalising candour, custody and disclosure norms would let NFSU-type bodies serve as genuine instruments of truth-finding and constitutional accountability.

(~315 words)

Sources: 1. The Hindu, "Forward entire audio clip 'linked' to Biren Singh to forensic lab: SC to Centre" (Jan 8, 2026) — SC direction to NFSU; selective submission of clippings 2. The National Forensic Sciences University Act, 2020 (India Code) — NFSU's statutory status as institution of national importance 3. Cabinet approves National Forensic Infrastructure Enhancement Scheme, PIB (2024) — ₹2,254.43 crore outlay, 9 NFSU off-campuses, 7 CFSLs, pendency and manpower 4. PRS Legislative Research, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — mandatory forensic visit and videography for offences punishable with 7+ years 5. Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd. v. Union of India, Supreme Court (5 April 2023) — limits on sealed-cover procedure and duty of disclosure