The Supreme Court held that involuntary narco-analysis violates Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. It ruled that narco-test results cannot independently establish guilt and clarified that an accused may seek such a test voluntarily only at an appropriate stage of trial.

Case Title: Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar

Citation: 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1326

Judges: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prasanna B. Varle

Supreme Court Jurisdiction: Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP under Article 136

FACTS:

  • Appellant was married to the complainant’s sister on 11th December 2020 and that appellant and other accused allegedly made repeated dowry demands along with beating her.
  • On August 21 2022, the Appellant and his wife were en route to Ayodhya, where she, according to appellant, got off the bus and never returned.
  • The complainant got a call from accused on 22nd August 2022 that his wife ran away, the complainant lodged FIR against appellant and his family on 24th August 2022.
  • Though all the family members got bail, the appellant prayed for regular bail on 1st August 2023, which was rejected by the session judge.
  • Dissatisfied with the order, the appellant approached High Court of Judicature at Patna for the grant of regular bail, which it granted, moreover it accepted the submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahua, to conduct Narco-analysis test of all accused persons.
  • Aggrieved from the judgement, the Appellant presented the appeal before the Supreme Court.

ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT:

  1. Whether, in attending facts and circumstances, the High Court could have accepted such a submission.
  2. Whether a report of a voluntary narco-analysis test can form the sole basis of conviction in the absence of other evidence on record.
  3. Whether an accused can voluntarily seek a narco- analysis test, as a matter of an indefeasible right.

Also Read – Summary of Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar (2014) : Curbing the Power of Arbitrary Arrest

ARGUMENTS:

APPELLANT: The appellant argued that the involuntary narco-analysis violated his constitutional right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3). Further, it violates right to privacy and right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the constitution of India.                

RESPONDENT: the respondent-state argued that since modern investigative technique is the need of the hour, the High Court was correct in accepting the submission that narco-analysis test of all accused persons.

DECISION:

  1. Forced or involuntary narco-analysis or similar tests are not admissible as evidence in the court. Hence the High Court erred in accepting the submission for such a test.
  2. Further even if the test is voluntary, the information extracted through such tests cannot be a sole basis to prove the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
  3. Accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test but at an appropriate stage and while looking at totality of the circumstances, and such a stage is when the accused is exercising his right to lead evidence in trial.

     RATIO DECIDENDI:

  1. Involuntary narco-analysis and other similar tests contravene the fundamental right to protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) and right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
  2.  The information received through such tests is merely a disclosure statement and without any supporting document, it can’t be deemed adequate to prove conviction on its own without bringing more evidence to prove the charges.
  3. The court observed that many individuals are unaware of their fundamental rights and many of them could be forced or threatened to give their consent to such tests by the investigators, in such cases such inquiry is not limited to apparent voluntariness but totality of the circumstances, like gravity of the offence and likelihood of influencing witness, likelihood of repeating the offence etc.

Also Read – The Importance of Judicial Review: Safeguarding Rights in India

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JUDGEMENT:

This judgement comes in light of right of the accused, many a times criminal justice system overlook the rights of the accused, like in the present case by conducting involuntary narco-analysis test, in such situations, the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution can’t be simply overlooked just because the person is an accused. The judgement reiterates that the right of the accused cannot be sacrificed in the pursuit of investigation or by any others means which is not in accordance with the procedure established by law under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Published exclusively on LegalRath. All rights in this article are reserved by LegalRath. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of this content is prohibited.