ABSTRACT:
The rapid development of digital technologies and forensic science has transformed criminal investigations across the world. In India, biometric data such as fingerprints, iris scans, facial recognition data, voice samples, DNA profiling, and retinal scans have become important investigative tools used by law enforcement agencies[1]. The enactment of the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 has considerably expanded the powers of investigating authorities to collect, store, and process biometric information of accused persons, convicts, and detainees.[2] While biometric technologies enhance the efficiency of criminal justice administration, they also raise serious constitutional and human rights concerns relating to privacy, bodily autonomy, surveillance, misuse of data, and informational self-determination[3].This research critically examines the legal status of biometric data in criminal investigations in India. The study analyses constitutional safeguards under Articles 14, 20(3), and 21 of the Constitution of India, statutory provisions under the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and relevant judicial precedents.[4] The research further evaluates the admissibility and evidentiary value of biometric evidence in criminal proceedings. Comparative analysis with international frameworks such as the European Union’s GDPR and United States forensic data practices is also undertaken[5].The study identifies significant gaps in Indian law relating to data protection safeguards, judicial oversight, proportionality standards, retention periods, and accountability mechanisms[6]. It argues that the absence of a comprehensive legal framework governing biometric surveillance may lead to abuse of state power and violation of fundamental rights[7]. The paper concludes with recommendations for balancing national security and effective criminal investigation with constitutional liberties and privacy rights.
INTRODUCTION:
Biometric data refers to measurable biological and behavioural characteristics used for identifying individuals. Common forms of biometric data include fingerprints, iris patterns, retina scans, DNA samples, facial recognition records, voice patterns, and palm impressions.[8] In contemporary criminal investigations, biometric technologies have become essential instruments for identification of suspects, verification of criminal history, crime scene analysis, and forensic examination[9].India has witnessed rapid technological transformation in policing and criminal justice administration.[10] The increasing dependence on biometric identification systems such as Aadhaar, facial recognition technologies, and forensic databases has altered the nature of criminal investigations[11]. Traditionally, the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 permitted collection of fingerprints and photographs from convicted persons and certain arrested individuals.[12] However, the enactment of the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 considerably widened the scope of data collection by empowering law enforcement agencies to collect various “measurements,” including fingerprints, palm impressions, footprints, photographs, iris and retina scans, signatures, handwriting, behavioural attributes, and biological samples[13]. The expanded powers of the State to collect and retain biometric information have generated constitutional concerns. The right to privacy recognized in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India established informational privacy as an intrinsic component of Article 21[14]. The collection of biometric data without adequate safeguards raises questions regarding proportionality, legality, consent, and procedural fairness[15].Moreover, biometric data possesses unique characteristics distinguishing it from ordinary personal information. Unlike passwords or identity numbers, biometric identifiers are permanent and cannot be altered if compromised[16]. Breaches involving biometric databases may expose individuals to lifelong risks of identity theft and surveillance.[17]This research analyses the legal status of biometric data in criminal investigations with special emphasis on constitutional protections, evidentiary admissibility, statutory frameworks, and privacy implications. The study adopts a doctrinal and socio-legal approach to critically examine whether existing Indian laws adequately balance effective criminal investigation with protection of civil liberties.
[1]Himanshu Mishra, The Legal and Ethical Implications of Biometric and DNA Evidence in Criminal Law, 12 Indian Journal of Law & Technology 44, 47 (2023).
[2]Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, No. 11, Acts of Parliament, 2022 (India).
[3]Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 S.C.C. 1.
[4]Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, No. 47, Acts of Parliament, 2023 (India).
[5]Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data (General Data Protection Regulation), 2016 O.J. (L 119) 1.
[6]DW News, India’s New Biometric Law Raises Privacy Concerns (Apr. 2022)
[7]Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.), (2017) 10 S.C.C. at 497.
[8]AZB & Partners, Biometric Data Regulation in India: Legal Landscape and Risks (2023).
[9]Ishan Sharma, Forensic Evidence and Law in India 78 (Eastern Book Co. 2022).
[10]Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, Crime in India 2023 Statistics (2023).
[11]Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), Aadhaar Authentication Framework (2023).
[12]Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920, No. 33, Acts of Parliament, 1920 (India).
[13]Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, § 2(b).
[14]Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.), (2017) 10 S.C.C. 1, 497–98.
[15]Id.
[16]AZB & Partners, supra note 8.
[17]Id.