ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND DIGITAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN INDIA AND THE UK

The criminal justice system globally is adopting predictive, AI-driven governance. This paper compares the legal and constitutional frameworks for AI and digital evidence in India and the UK, assessing how each country balances technological effectiveness with human rights protection the UK through systematic integration and India via selective adoption. Using a doctrinal approach, the study compares India's Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and the UK's PACE 1984 for digital evidence admission. It highlights AI tools like India’s CMAPS and the UK’s HART. A central concern is the "Black Box" problem of algorithmic opacity, which endangers the "Right to a Fair Trial" and the Right to an Explanation. The research finds a divergence: the UK has a stable framework (GDPR, Data Protection Act 2018), while India is in a state of flux with technology outpacing legal safeguards. Algorithmic bias is a key finding, with scrutiny for racial bias in the UK (HART) and caste/socio economic biases in India. The paper concludes by recommending independent oversight and a human-in-the-loop mechanism to ensure AI's evolution upholds constitutional morality and individual liberty. Key Words: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Digital Evidence, Predictive Policing, Comparative Jurisprudence (India & UK), Algorithmic Bias