LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Hasan Mohamed Jinnah (Advocate)     23 August 2009

Narco analysis test, Brain mapping, polygraph - Admissible?

Dear Friends,

i would like to know if there are any judgments to show that the test conducted by brain mapping, narco analysis or polygraph are admissible in evidence? and whwther conviction can be made only on  relying these test? if yes please cite the judgments,



Learning

 15 Replies

Md Shadab Ansari (Law Student & Human Rights Activist....)     23 August 2009

Its not clear yet.In some instance it has been addmitted despite it violates Article 20(3) and 21 of our constitution..I have posted some details regarding that visit the link below. https://lawyersclubindia.com/forum/message_display.asp?group_id=4757

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     23 August 2009

It is subjective. When Telgi named bigs guns in Narco (remember stamp paper scam), no body took any action. Even now court's permission is needed to conduct these tests. Police claims that such tests help them in investigation. But they are not admissible. To my knowledge they are not admissible in USA where it all originated.

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     23 August 2009

In 1989, the New Jersey Supreme Court (State v. Pitts) prohibited the use of sodium amytal narco analysis because the results of the interview were not considered scientifically reliable. The court ruled that subjects are susceptible to filling in gaps in stories with fabricated detail, or believing in false events, and hypnotic recall, where thoughts of non-existent events become embedded in the memory.But in India the practice goes on. In any case it can not be taken as a gospel truth and the court must be at liberty to have its final say in the matter and not the medical laboratory.

Shree. ( Advocate.)     23 August 2009

Some Notable Events & Cases of Narco Analysis in India-

I. In a 2006 judgment (Dinesh Dalmia v State), the Madras High Court held that subjecting an accused to narco analysis is not tantamount to testimony by compulsion. The court said about the accused: "he may be taken to the laboratory for such tests against his will, but the revelation during such tests is quite voluntary."

II. In 2004, the Bombay High Court ruled in the multi-crore-rupee fake stamp paper case that subjecting an accused to certain tests like narcoanalysis does not violate the fundamental right against self-incrimination. Article 20(3) of the Constitution guarantees this: "No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself." Statements made under narco analysis are not admissible in evidence.

III. In January 24th, 2008, a bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan reserved its ruling after hearing arguments for three days from various parties, including Solicitor General Goolam E. Vahanvati and senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appointed by the bench as amicus curiae to assist the court in the case.

Telgi and his accomplices are facing probe by various states' police and other investigative agencies for their alleged criminal acts.

These accused people have challenged the legality of the use polygraph, brain mapping and narco-analysis by the investigative agencies to probe the crime.

IV. The Bombay High Court recently in a significant verdict in the case of, Ramchandra Reddy and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, upheld the legality of the use of P300 or Brain finger-printing, lie-detector test and the use of truth serum or narco analysis. The court upheld a special court order given by the special court in Pune as mentioned above, allowing the SIT to conduct scientific tests on the accused in the fake stamp paper scam including the main accused, Abdul Karim Telgi. The verdict also said that the evidence procured under the effect of truth serum is also admissible. In the course of the judgment, a distinction was drawn between "statement" (made before a police officer) and "testimony" (made under oath in court). The Judges, Justice Palshikar and Justice Kakade, said that the lie-detector and the brain mapping tests did not involve any "statement" being made and the statement made under narco analysis was not admissible in evidence during trial. The judgment also held that these tests involve "minimal bodily harm".

V. A court in Kerala recently pronounced that no court order is required to do a narco analysis, Disposing of a petition filed by the CBI seeking permission of the court, the magistrate said that filing this type of a plea would only delay the investigation. The court said nobody could stand in the way of the investigating agency conducting tests recognized as effective investigation tools. When the technicalities of the test itself are not clear and uniform, it becomes difficult to accept the stand taken by the court.

For more details click the below link:

LINK: https://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Narco-Analysis-a-Reliable-Science?-The-Present-Legal-Scenario-In-India&id=991046

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     23 August 2009

Dear friends, 

Please download and read. Supreme Court is all in favour of lie detection test, narco analysis and brain mapping. No violation of Art.20 of Constitution involved.


Attached File : 33 narco-test-sc.pdf downloaded: 408 times

tk (none)     25 September 2009

Is this admissible for criminal cases only or for civil cases as well?

PJANARDHANA REDDY (ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR)     25 September 2009

 ALL USED AS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCES (WITH FURTHER/SUPPORTING PROVISO TO ESTABLISH AS ADMMISABLE IN THE COURTS.)GETTING COURT PERMISSION TO CONDUCT (UNDER ART.20 PROTECTION )IS MORE IMPORTANT.

1 Like

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     25 September 2009

 These tests help the investigating agencies find further proof/evidence. They are allowed by courts to be held but not admissible as evidence as yet. Their infallibility is not proved yet.

1 Like

tk (none)     25 September 2009

Thanks for the responses. Specifically wondering if I can use it to prove that my spouse is lying about our marriage being consummated in a divorce case?

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate (Advocacy)     25 September 2009

 yes i m also agree with mr. anil's view that These tests help the investigating agencies find further proof/evidence.................

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     25 September 2009

 It is no evidence. Nothing can be proved. The blabbering of the subject while undergoing narco test cannot be used against him. It will incriminate him.

Do we remember what Telgi said while undergoing narco test. Great names were mentioned. What happened? Buried under the carpet. Who can touch them?

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     25 September 2009

 Sach ka Samna has made the nation aware that there is something called polygraph test. The producer of the programme did not have the courage to tell the viewers that this test is of no value in evaluating evidence. It was a fraud played upon the nation. We are gullible people and accepted it as gospel truth. 

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     25 September 2009

 Instal polygraph test machines and dispense with the services of advocates and magistrates. The producer of Sach ka Samna should be the sole judge.

PJANARDHANA REDDY (ADVOCATE & DIRECTOR)     27 September 2009

WILL A TV REALITY SHOW MADE LOT OF CONFUSION EVEN THE EMINENT ,ELIT SHCOLORS TO BELIVE IT AS TRUE...THAT IS THE PITY OF OUR NATION...


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Recent Topics


View More

Related Threads


Loading
Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads



Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query