Forensic expert Dr Keshav Kumar calls for crackdown on counterfeits

At TAF Connect 2026, Dr Keshav Kumar, IPS (Retd.), delivered a technical presentation on the “Forensic Interface in the Investigation of Counterfeit Products: The Role of Authentication and Traceability,” placing the spotlight on weak enforcement outcomes despite widespread violations.

Kumar opened with the scale of the issue. “12–25% pharmaceuticals sold in India are believed to be fake,” he said, adding that in some sectors, counterfeit products account for “25–30% of the market.” Despite this, “conviction rates remain extremely low,” he noted, calling it the key area that requires intervention.

He framed counterfeiting as a criminal offence. “I consider any counterfeit case to be a case of forgery,” he said, stressing the need to treat such cases with the seriousness of organised crime.

Drawing from investigative experience, Kumar highlighted the role of digital forensics. “CDR and IPDR show the whole tentacles of the organisation… these cases often have interstate ramifications,” he said, pointing to the complexity of networks. In one instance, he noted, escalation ion  led to a central investigation. “The case has now been shifted to the CBI. I take pride in such escalation.”

He pointed to structural inefficiencies in prosecution. “Only 28% violations lead to convictions,” he said, citing factors such as “slow judicial processes, procedural lapses, stop-sale orders and easy bail” that weaken enforcement. He added that while FIRs and licence cancellations are increasing, outcomes remain limited.

Kumar extended the discussion to agriculture and food systems. “Fertiliser violations stand at 4.9% and seed violations at 2.72%,” he said, noting that these ultimately affect farmers and productivity. On food safety, he added, “Every day you get to know that there is food adulteration,” pointing to gaps such as “limited food safety officers, weak laboratory infrastructure and delayed testing.”

He stressed the importance of infrastructure. “Why can’t we build our own lab and get it NABL accredited so that the cases will speed up,” he said, underlining the need for stronger testing capabilities.

A recurring concern was lack of data. “We don’t have data on how many people have been arrested, once we have this data, we can immediately act in organised crime,” he said, calling for a more data-driven enforcement model.

Kumar also flagged gaps in investigative processes. “They don’t know about the chain of custody and that is the bane for all of us,” he said, emphasising that poor documentation weakens cases in court. He stressed the need for “scientific evidence, third-party validation and proper registration” to establish authenticity.

On technology, he highlighted the expanding role of forensic science. “Forensics can detect counterfeit products and identify adulterants,” he said, referencing advancements such as non-invasive identification methods. He also pointed to global benchmarks. “Interpol and FBI have repositories of inks,” he said, suggesting the need for similar systems in India.

He cautioned against over-reliance on visible security features. “Hologram verification is easy but how will the judge know it is authentic?” he asked, noting instances where counterfeiters replicated holograms. “In Coimbatore, counterfeiters were making holograms as well,” he said. Kumar emphasised financial and supply chain forensics. “Bank transactions, shell companies, cash-based distribution networks… who is going to investigate all these?” he asked. He added that “mobile communications and digital evidence are solid evidences accepted by courts.”

He also pointed to legal avenues. Referring to recent provisions, he noted that “under BNS, a criminal complaint can be filed if no action is taken by a drug officer,” highlighting evolving enforcement mechanisms. He also cited judicial interventions calling for stronger surveillance.

Summing up, Kumar outlined policy priorities. “There should be dedicated police control wings, stronger testing and surveillance systems and inter-agency coordination,” he said. He added, “Use documents as a power of investigation,” reinforcing the need for evidence-led prosecution.

The session underscored that while authentication and traceability technologies are critical, their real impact lies in how effectively they are integrated with forensic science, data systems and legal processes to secure convictions.