Supreme Court Ruling on Narco Tests
The Supreme Court has declared that forced or involuntary narco tests are unconstitutional, overturning a Patna High Court decision in Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2025). The Court criticized the High Court for violating the guidelines from Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010).
Understanding Narco Tests
- Narco tests are investigative procedures where a sedative, such as Sodium Pentothal, is used to lower inhibitions, prompting the accused to disclose concealed information.
- This method is non-violent and comparable to polygraphs or brain mapping.
Constitutional Provisions
The ruling emphasized Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects against self-incrimination, stating that individuals cannot be compelled to testify against themselves without free consent. The Court referenced the broader constitutional framework:
- Clause (1): Prohibits ex-post facto laws.
- Clause (2): Prevents double jeopardy.
- Clause (3): Protects against self-incrimination.
Balancing Rights in a Democratic System
The decision underlined the necessity to balance the rights of the victim and the accused within a democratic criminal justice system. It stressed the importance of personal liberty under Article 21, which includes the Right to Privacy, asserting that non-consensual tests violate fundamental human rights.
The ‘Golden Triangle’ of the Constitution
Articles 14, 19, and 21 form the ‘Golden Triangle’ of the Constitution as elucidated in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978). Violations of privacy also infringe upon the Right to Life and Personal Liberty.
Case Law and Procedural Safeguards
- Recent rulings, including Manoj Kumar Saini v. State of MP (2023) and Vinobhai v. State of Kerala (2025), have stated that narco test results do not alone confirm guilt and must be supported by additional evidence.
- The Court insisted on informed consent, to be recorded before a magistrate, with medical, legal, and procedural safeguards in place.
Principles of Informed Consent and Natural Justice
Informed consent reflects individual autonomy and natural justice. Philosopher Immanuel Kant advocated that actions must be consensual to be ethical. Thus, involuntary testing breaches ethical norms and fundamental human values.