ADMISSIBILITY OF BEOS EVIDENCE UNDER THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Abstract

This paper critically examines the admissibility of Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) evidence under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), against the backdrop of evolving forensic science and constitutional criminal procedure. It argues that while the BSA replaces the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, it substantially retains the colonial framework governing expert evidence, offering limited guidance on the admissibility of emerging neuroscientific techniques. Through an analysis of Section 39 of the BSA, judicial decisions on expert evidence, DNA profiling, electronic evidence, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Selvi v. State of Karnataka, the paper demonstrates that Indian courts have historically focused on expert qualifications, procedural authenticity, and constitutional safeguards rather than developing a structured reliability standard for novel scientific evidence. Using BEOS as a paradigm case, the study highlights concerns relating to scientific validity, reproducibility, peer review, known error rates, and constitutional fairness. It contends that courts should not admit BEOS evidence merely because it is presented through expert testimony or falls within the broad language of expert opinion provisions. Instead, the paper advocates a principled judicial gatekeeping framework based on scientific reliability and constitutional due process, drawing comparative insights from the Daubert and Frye standards. It concludes that a reliability-based approach is essential to ensure that only scientifically validated evidence influences criminal adjudication under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.