The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that conducting narco-analysis tests on persons accused in a case without their consent is not permissible and amounts to a violation of fundamental rights.
The court set aside a Patna High Court order that had permitted the test to be carried out on persons accused in a dowry death case.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prasanna B Varale held that the High Court had erred in accepting the investigating officer’s request to conduct narco-analysis tests on the accused while hearing a bail plea.
In a narco-analysis test, the accused is injected with sodium pentothal, a drug that puts them in a sedated state. In this condition, they are believed to be unable to lie and may reveal truthful information.
Calling it an “impermissible investigative shortcut in a bail proceeding”, the Supreme Court said that such an approach violates Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Constitution.
It added that a bail court cannot act as a “mini trial court” by allowing invasive procedures such as narco-analysis tests.
Article 20(3) of the Constitution protects individuals from being compelled to be a witness against themselves or give self-incriminating testimony. Article 21 pertains to protection of life and personal liberty.
The Supreme Court said that an accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at an “appropriate stage” of the investigation.
It added that even if the accused voluntarily agrees to a narco-analysis test, the results alone cannot be used to convict them.
“There is no indefeasible right to seek narco-analysis even voluntarily,” the court held.
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!