Forensic Pathology and Death Investigation Under India’s New Criminal Laws

Introduction

When a person dies under suspicious circumstances, the truth is rarely laid out in plain sight. There may be no eyewitness to tell the story, no confession to confirm suspicions, and sometimes not even a clear motive in sight. But there is always one silent witness — the human body.

Forensic pathology is the science of listening to that witness. It is the art of interpreting every bruise, wound, chemical trace, and microscopic clue to reconstruct the chain of events that led to death. Unlike popular portrayals in crime dramas, real-life forensic work is not about a single “Eureka” moment but rather a meticulous, methodical, and legally guided process.

In India, the stakes for this science have risen sharply since the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) came into force in 2023. These laws replaced the colonial-era Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and Indian Evidence Act. Among many reforms, they have pushed forensic science — particularly in death investigation — to the center stage of criminal justice.

The shift is not merely procedural. It is philosophical: moving from a justice system heavily dependent on witness testimony and confessions to one anchored in scientific objectivity.

Forensic Pathology: The Science Behind the Truth

At its core, forensic pathology deals with three interlinked determinations:

1. Cause of Death – The precise medical reason for death (e.g., myocardial infarction, cerebral hemorrhage, cyanide poisoning). This is the what of the death — the specific event or medical condition that directly resulted in the loss of life. Establishing the cause often requires correlating visible injuries with microscopic and chemical evidence to rule out alternative possibilities.
2. Manner of Death – The legal classification of death, which can be:

• Natural – resulting solely from disease or aging processes.
• Accidental – unintentional deaths caused by mishaps, like falls or traffic collisions.
• Suicidal – self-inflicted acts intended to cause death.
• Homicidal – death caused by another person’s actions.
• Undetermined – cases in which the available evidence is either insufficient or conflicting, making it impossible to reach a clear conclusion about the cause, manner, or circumstances of the event.

The manner shapes legal consequences, influencing whether an investigation escalates into a criminal trial or concludes without charges.

3. Mechanism of Death – The physiological process that resulted in death (e.g., asphyxia, hypovolemic shock, ventricular fibrillation). While the cause identifies what happened, the mechanism explains how it happened within the body’s systems. Understanding this bridge between cause and manner is critical for accurately reconstructing events in court.

In clinical medicine, a patient can describe symptoms, allowing the doctor to narrow possibilities. In forensic medicine, the patient is silent — the answers emerge only from the body itself, through physical evidence, laboratory analysis, and meticulous reconstruction of the scene.

The Legal Trigger for Death Investigations

Under BNSS Sections 194 & 195 — successors to the old CrPC provisions — certain deaths must be subjected to official inquest proceedings, including:

• Unnatural deaths (accidents, suicides, suspected murders)

• Deaths occurring in police or judicial custody

• Deaths under circumstances raising suspicion of foul play

These provisions mandate that the local magistrate or authorized police officer conduct an inquest. If initial inquiry suggests criminal involvement or if the cause is unclear, a medico-legal autopsy is ordered, performed by a government-recognized forensic pathologist.

These autopsies are not routine paperwork — they produce some of the most crucial physical evidence in court. An accurate post-mortem can be the difference between wrongful acquittal and rightful conviction.

Inside the Forensic Autopsy Process

A. External Examination

• Careful documentation of the body’s physical state, clothing, and identifying marks. This initial step preserves crucial visual evidence before any alteration occurs.

• Recording of visible injuries, scars, or ligature marks to establish possible causes or contributing factors.

• High-resolution photography from multiple angles ensures that every detail is captured for later review in court.

• Assessment for defensive wounds or restraint marks indicating struggle, which can help distinguish between accidental, suicidal, or homicidal circumstances. Even subtle abrasions or fingernail marks can hold significant evidentiary value.

B. Internal Examination

• Sequential opening of the cranial, thoracic, and abdominal cavities to reveal hidden injuries not visible externally.

• Detailed inspection of organs for trauma, disease, or hemorrhage, often providing the clearest link to the cause of death.

• Collection of organ samples for histopathological examination to detect underlying diseases, microscopic injuries, or delayed physiological changes that may have contributed to death.

• This stage allows the pathologist to connect internal findings with external evidence, painting a more complete forensic picture.

C. Ancillary Investigations

• Toxicology: Detecting alcohol, drugs, heavy metals, or poisons that may have contributed to death, whether intentionally administered or accidentally ingested.

• Histology: Microscopic analysis to confirm disease or injury patterns, especially when external clues are minimal.

• DNA Profiling: Linking the victim to suspects, crime scenes, or weapons with a high degree of scientific certainty.

• These specialized tests often provide the decisive evidence that bridges the gap between suspicion and proof.

Under the BSA 2023, digital records of these processes — including photographs, video recordings, and lab reports — enjoy clearer admissibility in court. This advancement reduces disputes over procedural irregularities, ensures transparency, and strengthens the chain of custody for forensic evidence.

What’s New Under the 2023 Criminal Law Reforms

The new laws have introduced significant forensic-friendly provisions:

• BNSS Section 196(3): Mandatory video recording of certain post-mortems, particularly in custodial deaths, to ensure transparency and prevent manipulation. These recordings act as an objective record of the procedure, safeguarding both the investigating agency and the rights of the deceased’s family.

• BNSS Section 196(4): Explicit provision for involving forensic experts during investigations to assist police and magistrates. This ensures that scientific perspectives are incorporated early in the investigation, reducing errors that might arise from purely witness-based or circumstantial approaches.

• BSA Provisions: Direct recognition of digital evidence, enabling seamless admission of autopsy reports, toxicology findings, and video documentation in trials. By removing procedural ambiguity, these provisions speed up judicial processes and strengthen the reliability of forensic inputs.

The reforms align with judicial observations in Pattu Rajan v. State of Tamil Nadu (2019), where the Supreme Court stressed the primacy of scientific evidence in criminal adjudication. This legislative backing turns that vision into a practical reality in everyday casework.

Why the Manner of Death is a Legal Game-Changer

In legal terms, the manner of death can dictate the entire trajectory of a case:

• Homicide: Triggers prosecution for murder or culpable homicide under the BNS. It is often the most closely scrutinized classification, as it carries the gravest legal consequences, including life imprisonment or the death penalty.
• Suicide: May lead to abetment charges if another person’s conduct contributed. Forensic findings help establish whether the act was truly voluntary or influenced by harassment, coercion, or instigation.
• Accident: Could result in liability for negligence or corporate manslaughter. Classification often hinges on whether injury patterns match the reported incident or suggest foul play.
• Natural: Often leads to case closure with no criminal liability, but must be firmly established through medical evidence to rule out concealed foul play.

Example: A ligature mark on the neck might indicate suicidal hanging or homicidal strangulation. The forensic pathologist’s interpretation, supported by injury patterns, internal findings, and scene evidence, can decide whether the death results in an FIR for murder or an inquest closure.

Notable Indian Case Studies

• • Aarushi Talwar Case (2013): Contradictory autopsy interpretations created deep controversy, underlining the need for standardized medico-legal reporting. The absence of uniform protocols meant that key observations were interpreted differently by various experts, ultimately affecting the direction and credibility of the investigation.

  • Sushant Singh Rajput Case (2020): Forensic toxicology played a role in ruling out poisoning, but delayed official communication allowed misinformation to dominate public discourse. This case highlighted the importance of timely, transparent release of forensic findings to prevent speculation from overshadowing evidence.

  • Tuticorin Custodial Deaths (2020): Sparked calls for mandatory video-recorded autopsies — a recommendation now embedded in BNSS. The incident exposed systemic flaws in custodial death investigations and reinforced the value of documented transparency to restore public trust.

Forensic Pathologists in the Courtroom

Under BSA Section 45, forensic pathologists are recognized as expert witnesses. Their responsibilities include:

• Presenting findings in clear, non-technical language so that judges, jurors, and lawyers without medical backgrounds can fully understand the evidence. Clarity ensures that the scientific value of their work is not lost in translation.

• Correlating injuries with probable weapons or force used, helping the court link physical evidence to specific acts or accused persons. This bridge between science and narrative is often critical to establishing guilt or innocence.

• Standing up to rigorous cross-examination without overstepping into speculation, maintaining professional credibility even under pressure. Expert restraint in sticking to evidence-based opinions can prevent a case from being undermined.

As observed in State of H.P. v. Jai Lal (1999), courts value expert opinions that are reasoned, evidence-based, and logically consistent, since these provide a trustworthy foundation for judicial decisions.

Persistent Challenges in India

Despite progressive reforms, systemic issues continue to limit effectiveness:

• Severe shortage of trained forensic pathologists, leaving many cases to be handled by general medical officers without specialized training. This shortage directly impacts the accuracy and reliability of autopsy findings.

• Delays in toxicology and histology reports due to overburdened labs, sometimes stretching for months, which slows down investigations and court proceedings. Time-sensitive evidence can lose its probative value in such delays.

• Outdated or inadequate mortuary facilities in many districts, lacking proper refrigeration, lighting, or modern equipment, which can compromise evidence preservation.

• Evidence tampering risks, particularly when the scene or body is disturbed before examination. This undermines the chain of custody and can render otherwise critical evidence inadmissible in court.

Global Best Practices India Could Emulate

• Minnesota Protocol (2016): UN-endorsed standards for investigating potentially unlawful deaths, ensuring impartiality, transparency, and respect for human rights in every case.

• UK Coroner System: An independent inquest process separated from police investigations, reducing conflict of interest and ensuring objective fact-finding.

• US Board Certification: Structured training and periodic re-certification for forensic pathologists to maintain high professional and scientific standards over the course of their careers.

Such measures could complement the Indian framework to create a globally respected death investigation system.

The Future: High-Tech Death Investigation

Emerging technologies hold promise for faster and more accurate forensic work:

• 3D Body Scanning: Enables “virtual autopsies” that preserve a digital record of the body’s anatomy before dissection, allowing independent review by multiple experts.

• AI Injury Analysis: Matches wound patterns against global crime databases to rapidly generate hypotheses about the cause and circumstances of injury.

• Portable Toxicology Kits: Allow on-site detection of drugs, alcohol, or poisons, enabling investigators to make quicker, evidence-based decisions.

• Blockchain Evidence Management: Creates a tamper-proof digital trail for forensic data, strengthening the chain of custody and admissibility in court.

With the BNSS and BSA provisions formally recognising digital evidence, such tools now enjoy a solid legal foundation in shaping India’s future investigations.

Building Public Trust

Law and science can only succeed if people believe in the system. Public reluctance toward autopsies — often rooted in cultural and religious sensitivities — can be mitigated by:

• Public outreach campaigns should explain the purpose, necessity, and respectful nature of forensic examinations to dispel myths and alleviate fears.

• Prompt, transparent sharing of autopsy conclusions to counter speculation and prevent misinformation from dominating the narrative.

• Strengthening coordination between law enforcement, medical examiners, and forensic labs to speed up investigations and ensure justice is both swift and fair.

Conclusion: Science as the Voice of Justice

The intersection of forensic pathology and law is where truth acquires its most unshakable form. The new criminal laws have brought India a step closer to a justice system that relies less on conjecture and more on scientifically established fact.

In the courtroom, scientific evidence is not swayed by threats, bribes, or emotions — it speaks in data, measurements, and irrefutable patterns. In suspicious death cases, this is the testimony justice needs most.

When science speaks, it does not whisper. It stands in the witness box, unblinking, and says: This is what happened.

Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India