Case Studies On Ai-Assisted Criminal Investigations
1. State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Vijay Palande (2020) – AI-Based Facial Recognition in Murder Investigation
Facts:
In the high-profile case involving the murder of businessman Arun Tikku and model Neeraj Grover, the Mumbai Police employed AI-based facial recognition technology to identify suspects captured in CCTV footage. The system compared facial features of potential suspects against the criminal database and matched Vijay Palande’s identity.
AI Role:
AI tools processed surveillance videos, enhancing clarity and using biometric data points to confirm identities. This reduced human error and helped establish the timeline of the accused’s movements.
Judicial Interpretation:
The court accepted AI-processed images as supporting evidence, provided the original CCTV footage was verified through forensic examination. It clarified that AI tools could aid investigations but cannot replace human authentication.
Significance:
This case marked an early judicial acceptance of AI-generated evidence in India, provided it was corroborated with traditional forensic proof and handled within evidentiary standards under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
2. United States v. Loomis (2016) – Predictive Policing & Algorithmic Sentencing
Facts:
Eric Loomis was convicted in Wisconsin, where a risk assessment algorithm (COMPAS) was used during sentencing to predict his likelihood of reoffending. The AI tool analyzed criminal history, social factors, and personal data to generate a “risk score.” Loomis challenged this, arguing the AI’s decision-making process was opaque and violated his right to due process.
AI Role:
The COMPAS system applied predictive analytics to guide judicial discretion in bail and sentencing decisions.
Judgment:
The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the use of AI-assisted tools but imposed strict conditions:
AI risk scores could support but not determine sentencing.
Judges must be aware of algorithmic limitations and potential biases.
Defendants retain the right to question the reliability of such systems.
Significance:
This case remains a cornerstone in debates over algorithmic transparency and fairness in AI-assisted justice, emphasizing human oversight in criminal adjudication.
3. State v. Arjun Pandit Rao Khotkar (2020) – AI-Enhanced Digital Evidence Authentication
Facts:
In a case concerning alleged forgery and digital tampering, AI-based forensic tools were used to authenticate digital documents and video clips submitted as evidence. The AI system analyzed metadata, compression patterns, and inconsistencies to determine whether the files were altered.
AI Role:
AI-powered forensic software detected micro-level manipulations in timestamps and data trails that human experts could not identify manually.
Judicial Interpretation:
The Supreme Court of India ruled that AI-based forensic reports are admissible under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, provided the certification process ensures authenticity and chain of custody.
Significance:
This judgment strengthened the legitimacy of AI in digital forensic validation, establishing that machine learning tools could complement expert testimony in identifying tampering and falsification.
4. R v. Stephen Port (UK, 2016–2019) – AI Crime Pattern Recognition in Serial Killings
Facts:
Stephen Port, a serial killer in London, used dating apps to lure victims. Initially, police treated each death as accidental. Later, the Metropolitan Police employed AI-driven data analysis to identify patterns in the deaths, including identical drug traces, timing, and location similarities.
AI Role:
AI software scanned databases for case similarities, toxicology reports, and behavioral data, identifying connections that manual review had missed.
Outcome:
The AI-assisted analysis led to Port’s arrest and conviction for four murders. Subsequent investigations revealed the system’s ability to detect overlooked connections in large-scale data, significantly improving investigative accuracy.
Significance:
This case illustrated how AI pattern recognition can uncover serial crime linkages, though it also highlighted the need for better initial data input to avoid investigative delays.
5. State v. Anvar P.V. (2014, India) – Foundations for AI-Based Digital Evidence
Facts:
Although predating direct AI use, this landmark case laid the groundwork for admissibility of electronically generated or processed evidence. The Supreme Court held that electronic evidence must be accompanied by a Section 65B certificate to be valid in court.
AI Connection:
Later, this precedent influenced how AI-analyzed digital evidence (such as voice recognition, facial analytics, and metadata extraction) could be accepted—ensuring the chain of authenticity is legally traceable.
Significance:
This case provides the legal basis for integrating AI tools into criminal investigations, defining how machine-generated data must comply with evidence law.
Conclusion
AI is reshaping modern criminal investigations by enhancing pattern detection, predictive analysis, and digital evidence authentication. However, courts worldwide continue to emphasize human oversight, algorithmic transparency, and evidentiary reliability to prevent misuse and bias.
RELATED Blog
0 comments