Brain Fingerprinting Indian Scenario

Our Indian Johnnies, be they the Bangalore FSL group [Dr Subramaniyam Malini & Br.Bannur Muthai Mohan ]who designate their technique as ‘brain-mapping’ or the Gujarat FSL group who label their technique with an impressive terminology ‘brain electrical oscillation signature profiling’, make use of only the EEG machine to detect the scalp electrical signal output. The signal detected by the scalp electrode is predominated by the excitatory and inhibitory post synaptic potentials on dendrites and neuronal cell bodies, not the deeper axon action potentials.
Thus EEG is a nonspecific indicator of cerebral function. Any pathophysiological insult to the central nervous system can result in alterations in electrophysiology. Thus with few exceptions does little in providing a precise diagnosis. EEG abnormalities are pronounced with acute injuries of the outer cortex. Disorders affecting deep brain structures or resulting in a chronic indolent loss of neurons may show little to no EE changes.
A listener who is sitting outside a football stadium cannot see the activity inside but may make some reasonable guesses about the course of the game based on hearing the fluctuating roar of the crowd. This vantage point does not allow the listener to understand fully the details of the game or what individual conversations may be taking place between the coach and players.
Similarly scalp electrode can detect the fluctuating tonic activity of millions of neurons allowing the electroencephalographer to make some broad assumptions about the functioning of the brain. However this technique is not sensitive to the exquisite detail that is needed to appreciate neural activity associated with cognitive processes or mood states. While this is the correct and latest assessment of EEG even in medical diagnosis, how can our non-medical psychologists claim to read reactions of the brain to pinpoint the guilty person? Another major discrepancy in brain fingerprinting is that the scalp electrode cannot make any distinction between the signals emanated from the brain of the perpetrator and the brain of those who have knowledge about the crime.
Dr. C.R. Mukundan who was an earlier associate of Mohan and Malini joined another psychologist of Ahmadabad FSL and claimed to have developed another brain finger printing technique called BEOS and started selling equipments to conduct his technique BEOS. Of course he simply buys EEG machine, computers etc from open market and sells them as a combined outfit along with his methodology with a huge margin of profit. He also projected his version of the debunked brain fingerprinting with the very strong support of Dr. M.S. Rao, Chief Forensic scientist, DFS attached to MHA, government of Indid, New Delhi
Dr. Rao being bemocked by the scientific community for his misgivings in public eulogising narcoanalysis and brain fingerprinting as the cornucopia for crime investigation, requested Professor D. Nagaraja, Director-Vice Chancellor, NIMHANS, Bangalore to head a committee formed by Rao himself and to conduct a technical peer review of the technologies developed by Malini and Mukundan. Dr Rao misjudged that the Committee would simply approve the brain fingerprinting technologies developed by Mukundan and Malini as they were earlier attached to NIMHANS. But the Committee found that for the technologies adopted by both
a) the scientific basis for forensic application is sub-optimal;
b) there are no peer-reviewed publication with relevance to normative data;
c) potential error rate is unknown;
d) procedural standards needs optimization; and
e) scientific acceptance not unequivocal
The Committee was categorical in saying that the tests cannot be used until extensive work is carried out and results rectifying the above discrepancies are published in peer-reviewed indexed journals. Dr. Rao, who was also a member of the committee, realising that the Committee’s findings would not be favourable to suit his designs, made it known that he dissolved the committee saying that ‘the Directors of FSLs decided to take care of their technologies!’
But the reality is that Rao had already committed a mistake of being party to use the test in actual cases using human beings as guinea pigs, and also published a ‘Manual of Procedure [2005] for brain fingerprinting under the Banner of MHA. There is an allegation that Dr.Rao had established business connections with Dr. Mukundan and it is to promote Mukundan’s machines he had christened the MHA manual with the name “Laboratory Procedure Manual Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) Profiling for Forensics”.
Dr. Mukundan claims now that he is Advisor to Directorate of Forensic Sciences, MHA, New Delhi in BEOS profiling. He is a Consultant in Cognitive Electrophysiology & Neuropsychology and Honorary Head of Research and Development team at the Axxonet Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore in India which is actually Dr. Mukundan’s establishment. The Axxonet Solutions in his guidance provides electrophysiological recording and computer analysis techniques for clinical applications, and Brain Electrical Oscillations Signature Profiling techniques for forensic applications!
Dr. Malini gave the name “Brain Mapping” for the technique used by her group in Bangalore. If Dr Rao had ventured to give a general unbiased name for the Manual for Fingerprinting, he could have given the name “Manual for Brain Electrophysiology Based Technologies”. Thus the allegation that Rao is indulging in private trade with Mukundan appears to be true.

But whatever name the two different groups adopt, they are simply the premature twisted versions of the American psychologist Farwell’s fingerprinting, aptly dumped by the Americans themselves as ‘it is an art, not a science’- Emanuel Duncan Chairman of the Department of Psychology , University of South Florida.
Barry Steinhardt, who directs a technology program for the American Civil Liberties Union says “It’s pure snake oil. There is no evidence to determine evil intent or anything else from brain fingerprinting. It is the 21st century version of the lie detector test, which also doesn’t work very well”. The Americans say ‘Let's not test it on U.S. citizens, but on people who want to travel to the U.S. Make brain fingerprinting (yes, it is a really bad name) a part of the visa application process’.
The Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics, an international non-profit organization is opposed to compulsory Brain Fingerprinting because it threatens cognitive liberty and violates the sanctity of the mind. Compelled Brain Fingerprinting intrudes on the individual's right to mental privacy; it should not be mandated by courts, governments, corporations, or any other institution. All these comments hold good if Brain fingerprinting technique is fully developed and accepted by the scientific community.
The Brain Fingerprinting technique stands premature where Farwell had left and the Indian Johnnies have not improved it a wee bit in scientific terms. Malini-Mohan group have already been found as hoax by their Karnataka Government. Dr Mukundan claims to have been ‘born with a screw-driver in his mouth’[His interview with Metro Plus, Kochi, The Hindu dated May 08, 2003] and even his screw driver could not overcome the following deficiencies attributed to Farwell’s technique.
i) There is no way to determine (a) whether the memory is correct or (b) from where it came.
ii) The scalp electrode cannot differentiate the signals emanate from the scalps of the perpetrator of the crime and others who have knowledge about the crime. The EEG machine that is fixed with Mukundan’s outfits ‘BEOS’ by his ‘screw driver’ is also a nonspecific indicator of cerebral function as described above.
While thus the technique of brain fingerprinting, in whatever terminology, our Indian Johnnies call it, continues to be premature and condemned by world bodies; the act of Dr Rao by bringing out a Laboratory Manual for Brain Fingerprinting rates at the peak of stupidity, The manual was released in the name of MHA is simply to support the sale of Mukundan’s half-baked outfit. Mukundan had already sold a few machines to FSLs thanks to the funds provided by Government of India under the Modernisation Scheme.
Dr. Rao has brought out a manual for Narcoanalysis already. Both the manuals brought out by Dr. Rao under the banner of MHA are unwarranted. Narcoanalysis is an age old established medical procedure which was discontinued for ethical and legal reasons as a primitive method. The world community of psychiatrists considers the manual as a stupid exposition. The provision that “the entire procedure is audio-video graphed and CD record is made” has given room for trading in Narco CDs and displaying the torture imputed to ‘crimes suspects’ publicly through TV channels like horror movies.
The Manual on Brain fingerprinting sounds like the brochure brought out to promote the product BEOS of Mukundan’s company. In the fifty six references cited, no paper pertains to the improvement made in the method for forensic use. A paper presented by Mukundan in a conference held in 1979 is also cited! By looking into the references cited, we are sure that the manual was prepared by Mukundan and Dr. Rao issued the same under the banner of MHA. Infact no laboratory manuals contain such references. It is a shame on the nation that the chief forensic scientist of the directorate in MHA, which proclaims ‘Promoting Good Practices and Standards’ as its motto, is indulging in such a gigantic fraud of malpractices and mean standards, joining hands with the proven fraudulent persons, Malini and Mohan and cheating the police, judiciary, media and the public for the past eight years. The trio, Malini, Mohan and M.S.Rao are the three mountebanks among Indian Forensic Scientists
Professor Dr. P.Chandra Sekharan has now taken up the issue with the Government of India. He is the crusader fighting against the use of Narcoanalysis and brain fingerprinting by the Indian Police in crime investion for the past eight years.