Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice PB Varale in the matter of Amlesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar has observed that an accused can voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test, but only at the appropriate stage of the trial—specifically, when exercising the right to present evidence in their defence.  

• The Court further stated that this is not an absolute or guaranteed right, as it depends on various factors that the trial court must consider. 

What was the Background of Amlesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar (2025) Case? 

Case Background: 

• FIR No.545 of 2022 was registered on 24th August 2022 at P.S. Mahua under Sections 341, 342, 323, 363, 364, 498(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).  
• The case was registered against the appellant (husband) and his family members. 
• The complainant alleged that her sister got married to the appellant on 11th December 2020. 

Allegations in the FIR: 

• The accused persons had been making repeated demands for dowry. 
• The accused persons had been beating the complainant's sister. 
• On 22nd August 2022, the complainant received a call from the appellant informing that her sister had run away from the matrimonial home. 
• Despite searching, the sister could not be located and the complainant suspected foul play by the accused persons. 

Appellant's Version: 

• On 21st August 2022, while enroute to Ayodhya, his wife got off the bus at Baabali Chawk for nature's call but never returned. 
• The appellant filed a complaint before P.S. Jahangir Ganj, recorded as GD No. 038, on 28th August 2022. 

Current Status: 

• The missing person (wife) has not been found to date. 
• The mother, father and brothers of the appellant have been granted bail by the High Court of Judicature at Patna. 
• The appellant's prayer for regular bail was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in B.P.No.1141 of 2023. 
• The rejection was based on allegations in the FIR and confessional statements of co-accused who stated that they had thrown the missing person in the river Saryu on the intervening night of 21st and 22nd August 2022. 

High Court's Impugned Order: 

• The appellant approached the High Court of Judicature at Patna for grant of regular bail vide Crl. Misc. No.71293 of 2023. 
• The High Court accepted the submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahua, that she will conduct narco-analysis test of all the accused persons and other witnesses during investigation. 
• The case was posted for hearing on 12th July 2024. 

Appeal to Supreme Court: 

• Aggrieved by the High Court's impugned Order dated 9th November 2023, the appellant approached the Supreme Court. 
• The present appeal arises out of SLP (Crl.) No.5392 of 2024. 
• Leave was granted and the case was converted to Criminal Appeal. 
• The Supreme Court appointed Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Senior Advocate, as Amicus Curiae vide Order dated 22nd April 2025 to assist the Court given the issues involved.

What were the Court’s Observations? 

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court: 

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

Legal Principles from Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010): 

• Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) are non-derogable and sacrosanct rights to which the judiciary cannot carve out exceptions. 
• Involuntary administration of narco-analysis and similar tests is in contravention of the protection given by Article 20(3) of the Constitution (right against self-incrimination). 
• The results of such involuntary tests cannot be considered as 'material evidence' in the eyes of the law. 
• Conducting such tests in the absence of consent violates 'substantive due process'. 
• The boundaries of privacy of a person are also breached when these tests are conducted without consent. 
• For voluntary tests, appropriate safeguards must be in place and results cannot be admitted directly as evidence. 
• Any fact or information discovered subsequently with the help of information supplied in the result can be admitted into evidence with the aid of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872. 

Court's Analysis and Findings: 

On High Court's Acceptance of Narco-Analysis Submission: 

• Under no circumstances is an involuntary or forced narco-analysis test permissible under law 
• The High Court's acceptance of the submission to conduct narco-analysis test is in direct contravention to the judgment in Selvi case. 
• Such submission and its acceptance is hit by the protections under Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. 
• The High Court erred in accepting such a submission when adjudicating an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC). 

On Bail Applications: 

• While entertaining an application for grant of bail, the Court has to consider allegations against the accused, period of custody undergone, nature of evidence and crime, likelihood of influencing witnesses and other relevant grounds. 
• It does not involve entering into a roving enquiry or accepting the use of involuntary investigative techniques. 
• The High Court converted the adjudication of a bail matter to that of a mini trial, which is deprecated. 

On Evidentiary Value of Narco-Analysis: 

• A report of a voluntary narco-analysis test, even with adequate safeguards in place, cannot form the sole basis of conviction of an accused person. 
• Information received through the aid of Section 27 of the Evidence Act cannot be the sole basis for conviction in the absence of supporting evidence. 
• Disclosure statements, unaccompanied by any supporting evidence, are not adequate to secure a conviction. 

On Right to Undergo Narco-Analysis Test: 

• There is a divergence of views among High Courts on whether narco-analysis test can be claimed by an accused as a matter of right. 
• The accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at an appropriate stage (when exercising right to lead evidence in trial). 
• However, there is no indefeasible right with the accused to undergo a narco-analysis test. 
• Upon receipt of such application, the concerned Court must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the matter, such as free consent, appropriate safeguards etc. 

Guidelines for Voluntary Narco-Analysis Test: 

• No test should be administered except on the basis of consent of the accused. 
• If the accused volunteers, he should be given access to a lawyer and implications should be explained. 
• The consent should be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate. 
• During the hearing before the Magistrate, the person should be duly represented by a lawyer. 
• The person should be told that the statement will not be a "confessional" statement but will have the status of a statement made to the police. 
• The Magistrate shall consider all factors relating to detention including length of detention and nature of interrogation. 
• The actual recording should be done by an independent agency and conducted in the presence of a lawyer. 
• A full medical and factual narration of the manner of information received must be taken on record. 

Final Decision: 

• The impugned Order dated 9th November 2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna is set aside. 
• The bail application of the appellant, pending if any, to be decided in accordance with law. 
• The appeal is allowed.

What is Narco Test? 

About the Test:  

• In a narco analysis test, a drug called sodium pentothal is injected into the body of the accused, which transports them to a hypnotic or sedated state in which their imagination is neutralised. 
• In this hypnotic state, the accused is understood as being incapable of lying and is expected to divulge information that is true. 
• In India, Narco analysis tests were notably used in the 2002 Gujarat riots case, and the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack case.  

About Sodium Pentothal: 

• Sodium pentothal, or sodium thiopental, is a fast-acting, short-duration anaesthetic used in larger doses to sedate patients during surgery. 
• It belongs to the barbiturate class of drugs that act on the central nervous system as depressants. 
• Because the drug is believed to weaken the subject’s resolve to lie, it is sometimes referred to as a “truth serum” and is said to have been used by intelligence operatives during World War II.

Narco vs Polygraph Tests: 

• Narco tests must not be confused with polygraph tests, which, although having the same truth-decoding motive, work differently. 
• A polygraph test is carried out on the assumption that physiological responses triggered when one is lying are different from what they otherwise would be. 
• Rather than injecting drugs into the body, polygraph tests attach instruments like cardio-cuffs or sensitive electrodes to the suspect and measure variables such as blood pressure, pulse rate, respiration, change in sweat gland activity, blood flow, etc., while the suspect is being questioned.

What are the Legal Implications of Narco Tests? 

• Selvi v. State of Karnataka & Anr Case (2010): 
  • The Supreme Court ruled on the legality and admissibility of narco tests establishing that the involuntary administration of narco or lie detector tests constitutes an intrusion into an individual's "mental privacy." 
  • The apex court held that narco tests violate the fundamental right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution which states that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal Case (1997): 
  • The Supreme Court ruled that involuntary administration of the polygraph and narcos test will amount to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment in the context of Article 21 or the Right to Life and Liberty. 
• Other Observations of the SC: 
  • Narco tests are not reliable or conclusive as evidence, as they are based on assumptions and probabilities. 
  • Any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntarily administered test results can be admitted, in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872. 
    • For example: If an accused reveals the location of a physical piece of evidence (something like a murder weapon) in the course of the narco test and the police later find that specific piece of evidence at that location, the statement of the accused will not be treated as evidence, but the physical evidence will be valid. 
  • There is no guarantee that the person who undergoes such tests will reveal only the truth. There are chances of manipulation and fabrication of results by vested interests. 
  • Narco tests can be conducted only with the consent of the accused, and that too after informing them about their rights and consequences. 
  • The court also emphasized that the ‘Guidelines for the Administration of Polygraph Test on an Accused’, published by the National Human Rights Commission in 2000, must be strictly followed.