Supreme Court: No Indefeasible Right With Accused To Undergo Narco-Analysis Test; But Can Apply To Court
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned Order passed by the Patna High Court, which had accepted the submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer to conduct narco-analysis tests on the Appellant.
The Supreme Court held that there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narcoanalysis test.
But he can file an application the concerned Court seeking it and the Court, must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the matter, such as free consent, appropriate safeguards etc, the Court said.
The Court set aside the impugned Order passed by the Patna High Court, which had accepted the submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer to conduct narco-analysis tests on all accused persons, including the Appellant during the investigation.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prasanna B Varale held, “The accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narcoanalysis test at an appropriate stage. We deem it appropriate to add, that the appropriate stage for such a test to be conducted is when the accused is exercising his right to lead evidence in a trial. However, there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narcoanalysis test, for upon receipt of such an application the concerned Court, must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the matter, such as free consent, appropriate safeguards etc., authorizing a person to undergo a voluntary narco-analysis test.”
The Court appointed Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, as an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court given the issues involved. AOR Mithilesh Kumar Singh appeared for the Appellant, while Additional Standing Counsel Anshul Narayan represented the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The significant ground of challenge taken was that the acceptance of such a submission by the High Court is in direct contravention of the exposition of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) , wherein it was held that forceful subjection of an individual to techniques, such as the narco-analysis test, violates personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Court’s Reasoning
The Supreme Court held, “Consequently, in our view, a report of a voluntary narcoanalysis test with adequate safeguards as well in place, or information found as a result thereof, cannot form the sole basis of conviction of an accused person. The second question is, therefore, answered in the negative.”
“We are not inclined to accept the submission of the Respondent- State that since modern investigative techniques are the need of the hour, the High Court was correct in accepting the submission that narco-analysis test of all accused persons will be conducted. 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 Bench held.
“In our view, as rightly submitted by the learned Amicus, the above view of the Rajasthan High Court cannot be sustained. It cannot be said that undergoing a narco-analysis test is part of the indefeasible right to lead evidence, given its suspect nature, and moreover, we find the same to be in the teeth of the judgment of this Court in Selvi (supra),” the Court explained.
The Bench further stated, “Moreover, we fail to understand how such an endeavour was accepted by the High Court when adjudicating an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is settled law that while entertaining an application for grant of bail, the Court has to take into consideration the allegations against the accused; period of custody undergone; nature of evidence and the crime in question; likelihood of influencing witnesses and other such relevant grounds.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “Keeping in view the above discussion, we have no doubt that the impugned Order cannot be sustained. Consequently, the impugned Order dated 9th November 2023 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 71293 of 2023 by the High Court of Judicature at Patna is hereby set aside.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Amlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 810)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR Mithilesh Kumar Singh; Advocates Ashutosh Kumar Singh and Manju Singh
Respondents: Additional Standing Counsel Anshul Narayan; AOR Prem Prakash
