The court made it clear that forcing someone to undergo such a test without their agreement is a serious violation of privacy and represents an unfair use of police power.
NEW DELHI: 9th June: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that a narco-analysis test cannot be conducted on an accused without their consent, and even if done voluntarily, the result cannot be the sole reason to convict someone in a criminal case.
The apex court said that while the police may want to use modern investigative methods, these must never violate constitutional protections guaranteed under Articles 20(3) and 21, which deal with the right against self-incrimination and personal liberty.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and PB Varale passed this verdict while overturning a 2023 order of the Patna High Court, which had approved a police request to conduct narco-analysis tests on both the accused and witnesses in a dowry harassment case involving the mysterious disappearance of a woman.
“We have no doubt that the impugned order cannot be sustained,” the bench declared.
It made it clear that, “under no circumstances is an involuntary or forced narco-analysis test permissible under law.”
The top court criticised the Patna High Court for allowing such a test, stating that the ruling went against an earlier landmark decision — the 2010 Selvi vs State of Karnataka case, where a three-judge bench had ruled that these tests are unconstitutional if done without consent.
ALSO READ:
“Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution are non-derogable and sacrosanct rights to which the judiciary cannot carve out exceptions…”, the bench emphasised. Further, it said, “Involuntary administration of narco-analysis and similar tests is in contravention of the protection given by Article 20(3)…The results of such involuntary tests cannot be considered as material evidence in the eyes of the law.”
What is a Narco-Analysis Test?
A narco-analysis test is a forensic technique in which a suspect is given psychoactive drugs to make them lose their inhibitions and speak more freely, in the hope of getting hidden information. However, the court noted that such tests come with high risks of violating individual rights, especially when done without consent.
The court made it clear that forcing someone to undergo such a test without their agreement is a serious violation of privacy and represents an unfair use of police power.
It dismissed the Bihar government’s argument that “modern investigative techniques are the need of the hour”.
In response, the bench firmly said, “While the need for modern investigative techniques may be true, such investigative techniques cannot be conducted at the cost of constitutional guarantees under Articles 20(3) and 21.”
The court clarified that if a narco test is done voluntarily, at the right stage of trial, and with safeguards in place, it may be allowed. But even then, the results of that test alone cannot be used to convict a person.
“A report of a voluntary narco-analysis test with adequate safeguards in place, or information found as a result thereof, cannot form the sole basis of conviction,” the court explained.
This is based on the Indian Evidence Act’s Section 27, which only allows discoveries resulting from an accused’s statements under specific and limited circumstances.
Is There a Right to Demand a Narco Test?
A third big issue tackled by the Supreme Court was whether an accused person can demand a narco-analysis test as their right to produce evidence in their favour.
Senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal, who helped the bench as amicus curiae, pointed out that some High Courts — including Rajasthan High Court — had earlier ruled that an accused could request such a test as a part of their right to present evidence.
The Supreme Court rejected that idea, ruling, “It cannot be said that undergoing a narco-analysis test is part of the indefeasible right to lead evidence, given its suspect nature… Such a right is not absolute.”
At the same time, the bench allowed for the possibility that an accused can request a narco test voluntarily during the trial stage, and in such cases, the trial court must carefully check if the consent is real and if all safeguards are being followed.
ALSO READ: [RG Kar Rape-Murder] CBI Seeks Narco Test for Ex-Principal Sandip Ghosh
“The accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at an appropriate stage… However, there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narco-analysis test,” the judgment clarified.
Finally, the Supreme Court criticised the Patna High Court’s decision to allow a narco test at the bail stage, calling it premature and legally inappropriate.
“It does not involve entering into a roving enquiry or accepting the use of involuntary investigative techniques,” the top court held, pointing out that a bail hearing is not the correct time for such an extreme investigative measure.
Case Name: Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
View Order
