SC rules narco-analysis without consent violates Articles 20(3) and 21. Bail courts can’t allow such invasive tests, even during investigations.
New Delhi: Today, on June 09, in a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India cancelled an order passed by the Patna High Court, which had allowed narco-analysis tests on accused persons without their consent.
The apex court strongly held that such investigative techniques violate the fundamental rights of individuals and cannot be permitted, even during the stage of deciding bail applications.
A two-judge bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prasanna B Varale observed that the High Court had made a serious mistake by approving the request of the investigating officer to conduct narco-analysis tests on all the accused persons, including petitioner Amlesh Kumar, when hearing his bail plea.
The Supreme Court stated clearly that such tests without consent go against the Indian Constitution, especially Articles 20(3) (protection against self-incrimination) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty).
The Court pointed out that this order was also contrary to the earlier ruling in the landmark case Selvi v. State of Karnataka, where the apex court had laid down that narco-analysis, brain-mapping and lie detector tests without consent are illegal.
Quoting the judgment, the Bench said:
“The High Court’s acceptance of a proposed narco-analysis test, without consent, is unconstitutional and amounts to an impermissible investigative shortcut in a bail proceeding.”
The Supreme Court warned that a bail court cannot turn into a trial court and use such invasive procedures during the bail stage.
“A bail court cannot convert itself into a ‘mini trial court’ by allowing such invasive procedures,”
the Court said, underlining the limited scope of bail hearings.
This case is related to the mysterious disappearance of Amlesh Kumar’s wife in August 2022.
The police suspected that something criminal had happened and wanted to conduct narco-tests not only on all accused persons but also on some witnesses to uncover the truth.
The Patna High Court, in November 2023, had accepted this request and postponed the decision on granting bail. This led Amlesh Kumar to challenge the order in the Supreme Court.
The top court emphasized that even if a person voluntarily agrees to undergo a narco-analysis test, it does not give the prosecution a direct path to secure a conviction.
Such test results must follow the due process of law under the Indian Evidence Act.
“Even voluntary narco tests cannot, by themselves, become the basis of conviction and any evidence discovered thereafter must comply with Section 27 of the Evidence Act and strict procedural safeguards.”
The Bench added further:
“There is no indefeasible right to seek narco-analysis even voluntarily.”
After considering the facts and the legal position, the Supreme Court set aside the Patna High Court’s interim order.
The Bench directed the lower court to now consider Amlesh Kumar’s bail application based only on the merits of the case, without relying on unconstitutional methods.
The Supreme Court also expressed its appreciation for Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, who assisted the court as amicus curiae (a neutral legal expert appointed to help the court in complex matters).
Case Title:
Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Our Reports on EVM
