Legal Consequences of Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Court Procedures

Introduction

Two of the most cutting-edge innovations of the digital age are virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR). Usually accessed through specialised headgear, virtual reality (VR) is a fully immersive, computer-generated environment that mimics physical presence in actual or imagined worlds. Contrarily, augmented reality (AR) uses gadgets like smartphones or smart glasses to superimpose digital data on the physical environment, improving the user’s sense of reality. These technological advancements are drastically changing a number of industries, including the judicial system.

VR and AR provide ground-breaking possibilities for witness testimony, crime scene reconstruction, and evidence presentation especially for countries like India, where the judiciary is experiencing a major digital makeover through programs like the e-Courts Mission Mode Project. In contrast to conventional evidence, new technologies provide digital worlds that are realistic, interactive, and extremely convincing, with the potential to completely transform the way that justice is carried out.

However, incorporating them into court proceedings also presents difficult moral and legal issues. VR and AR create serious issues about admission requirements, authenticity verification, privacy safeguards, and potential fraud, even if they can improve judicial speed and accuracy. The use of VR and AR in courtrooms requires a thorough analysis of current legislation, court decisions, and ethical issues because India’s legal system is still developing in its approach to digital evidence.

This article examines the legal implications of VR and AR in Indian judicial proceedings, weighing the advantages, disadvantages, and necessity of regulatory protections. It looks at how Indian law might change to guarantee that modern technologies are applied sensibly without sacrificing the concepts of due process, fair trials, and the integrity of the evidence. Current uses, legal issues under Indian law, and suggestions for a fair strategy for the introduction of technology in the judicial system are all covered in the discussion.

The Role of VR and AR in Indian Court Proceedings

Virtual Crime Scene Reconstructions

Reconstructing murder scenes is one of the most promising uses of VR in the Indian judicial system. Judges, attorneys, and even jurors (in the unusual case of a jury trial) can digitally “walk through” crime scenes created by investigative organisations such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and state forensic departments using VR.

For example, VR reconstructions would have made it easier to comprehend the following aspects of high-profile criminal cases, like the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks or the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape case:

• Spatial linkages (e.g., positions of victims, assailants, and weapons).
• The order of events (e.g., timing of injuries, movement of attackers).
• Forensic evidence (such as firearm trajectories and patterns of blood splatter).

Nevertheless, in order for these reconstructions to be accepted, they have to adhere to:

• Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (expert judgement on scientific evidence).
• Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (admissibility of electronic documents).
• The Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Anvar P.V. vs. P.K. Basheer, which requires digital evidence to include an authenticity certificate.

Making sure VR reconstructions are devoid of bias or manipulation is a major problem. VR surroundings, in contrast to photos or films, may be algorithmically changed, which raises questions about deceiving the court.

Virtual Testimonies and Remote Witness Examination

Section 273 of the CrPC, which allows for distant witness examination, saw an increase in use in Indian courts during the COVID-19 outbreak. This may be further enhanced by VR and AR by:

• Developing virtual courtrooms in which witnesses testify with VR avatars.
• Using AR overlays to draw attention to important evidence during testimony (e.g., annotating papers or photographs of crime scenes in real-time).

This might be especially helpful in situations where there are:

• Traumatised witnesses (such as survivors of sexual assault who would feel more comfortable testifying online).
• Expert witnesses, such as forensic scientists who use interactive 3D models to explain difficult findings.

However, there are concerns such as:

• Deepfake manipulation (covered by Section 66E of the IT Act, 2000, which punishes morphing and identity theft).
• Intimidation of witnesses (such as hackers interfering with online testimony).
• Verification issues (how can judges verify the authenticity of a VR testimony?).

Enhanced Evidence Presentation with AR

With AR, attorneys may overlay digital data on physical evidence to help with the following:

• Reconstructing accidents (e.g., overlaying vehicle speeds and impact angles in hit-and-run cases).
• Using fingerprints to visualise forensic data, such as how a weapon was handled.

For instance, AR may display a 3D representation of a patient’s internal damage to illustrate surgical mistakes in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Such evidence must, however, adhere to the requirements of:

• Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act (relevance).
• Section 73A (electronic record proof).

To evaluate AR-based evidence impartially and prevent it from excessively influencing their decision, judges might need specific training.

Legal Challenges in the Indian Context

Admissibility and Authentication of VR/AR Evidence

Indian courts adhere to stringent guidelines regarding electronic evidence under:

• Section 65B of the Evidence Act, which demands a certificate from the individual who created the electronic record,
• The Indian Cyber Law (IT Act, 2000), which makes altering digital evidence illegal.

Important concerns include:

1. Who certifies reconstructions using VR and AR?

o Should it be an investigating officer, software developer, or forensic specialist?

2. Can the technology be cross-examined by opposing parties?

o There are issues with justice because a VR simulation cannot be cross-examined the way a person witness can.

Privacy and Data Security Risks

The following rights may be violated by VR/AR systems that gather biometric data (such as voice recordings and eye movements):

• Right to Privacy (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy Judgement, 2017).
• The 2023 Digital Personal Data Protection Act, which mandates consent before collecting data.

Furthermore, the following might be compromised by hacking risks:

• Private case information kept in VR evidence.
• The anonymity of witnesses in online testimony.

Judicial Bias and Psychological Impact

Even though India has a judge-led judicial system rather than a jury-based one, the immersive nature of virtual reality might nevertheless:

• Unconsciously sway judges because of intensely realistic simulations.
• Encourage emotional bias (for example, graphic images of murder scenes can trigger prejudice).

It could be necessary for the Bar Council of India to establish ethical standards to stop attorneys from manipulating VR and AR.

The Digital Divide and Accessibility

Not every Indian court has

• Funding for AR and VR technologies.
• The ability to handle digital evidence technically.

This can result in an unfair legal system where VR/AR tools are only useful for well-known cases or affluent plaintiffs.

 Regulatory and Ethical Considerations

To address these challenges, India should consider:

1. Reforms in the Law

• Defining VR/AR evidence standards by amending the Indian Evidence Act.
• The Supreme Court’s rules regarding authenticating procedures.

1. Judicial Training

• The National Judicial Academy (NJA) courses on evaluating electronic evidence.
• Court employees receive cybersecurity instruction from the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C).

1. Moral Protections

• Prohibiting the use of VR/AR evidence that has been altered, much like doctored videos.
• Getting witnesses’ permission to testify virtually.

Conclusion

VR and AR have the ability to completely transform India’s legal system by enhancing trial efficiency, witness security, and the clarity of the evidence. To avoid abuse, prejudice, and privacy concerns, their adoption must be strictly monitored. Policymakers, judges, and attorneys must work together to develop a balanced framework that uses technology while respecting constitutional rights and the norms of a fair trail as India transitions to a digitally empowered judicial system. Justice must continue to be genuine, open, and unbiased even though Indian courts may have a virtual future.

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