Navigating the Changing Terrain of Evidential Aspects in Adjudication: A Critical Analysis

The evolution of legislation concerning “evidential aspects” in adjudication has been marked by a dynamic trajectory, from the exclusive focus on evidence in "The Indian Evidence Act, 1872" to the nuanced inclusion in contemporary statutes like the POCSO Act. This paper explores the transformative landscape shaped by new laws and schemes enacted by the parliament, encompassing diverse forms of evidence, including the Data Protection Act and a meticulously crafted Witness protection scheme by the Central Government in 2018. In addition to that we are conducting a critical analysis comparing the inquisitorial and adversarial systems in the United States and India respectively. While recognizing the advancements made, the paper also explores challenges, including the intricate matter of determining age under the POCSO Act and the reluctance to fully embrace technology in a continuously changing environment. This paper examines the intricacies of the current legislation and its profound implications on the domain of “evidential aspects” during adjudication in general and the effectiveness of its implementation in particular. However, it has not been without setbacks, such as the threatening issue of “age determination” of minors under the POCSO Act. We also believe that we have all the necessary pieces of legislation to tackle any issue that can be a hindrance to evidential aspects during adjudication. This paper was developed through doctrinal research, utilizing primary and secondary sources like statutes, cases, articles, journals, and books. This paper recommends the need for the government to provide adequate resources to make the facilitation of security of all the evidential aspects in the court of law more conducive, and we also call for the funding and training of IOs to be under the purview of the NCPCR. This alignment aims to ensure that the NCPCR fulfils its primary purpose and objectives effectively. Finally, in advocating for comprehensive reform, this paper underscores the imperative of facilitating access to justice.