Chhattisgarh High Court: Police Cannot Force Narco or Polygraph Tests Without Consent
The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that police cannot compel any person to undergo narcoanalysis, polygraph, or brain mapping tests without their voluntary and informed consent. The court emphasised that such scientific investigative techniques must strictly adhere to constitutional and procedural safeguards.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal was hearing a writ petition filed by two residents of Raigarh, who alleged that the police were attempting to subject them to forensic tests despite not being named in the First Information Report (FIR) in a murder case.
“No individual can be forcibly subjected to narco-analysis, polygraph examination, Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) test, or any similar scientific investigative technique. Such techniques may be administered only in accordance with law and with due regard to constitutional and procedural safeguards, including informed consent and judicially recognized protections,” the court held.
The case originated from a murder investigation registered at Chakradharnagar Police Station. The petitioners claimed they were repeatedly summoned, their mobile phones seized without due process, and they were asked to appear in Raipur for the tests without their consent. They sought protection from what they described as arbitrary and coercive police action.
The petition stated that the case was registered against unknown persons under sections 103(1) (murder) and 238A (causing disappearance of evidence) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The petitioners contended they were neither named as accused nor was any incriminating material found against them. They relied on an investigation report submitted by the investigating officer to the sessions court on June 16, which recorded that no evidence had emerged against them.
Despite this, they alleged they were called to the police station for nearly 18 consecutive days, detained for prolonged periods, compelled to sign an undertaking, and deprived of their mobile phones without seizure memos. They further alleged that the police directed them to undergo brain mapping, polygraph, and narcoanalysis tests without judicial authorisation or their consent.
The state opposed the plea, arguing it was premature as the investigation was ongoing. It said the petitioners were merely called for questioning after certain facts surfaced. The prosecution denied allegations of harassment, illegal detention, and coercion, and argued that no forensic examination could be conducted except legally.
The high court noted that the petitioners were not named in the FIR and the investigating officer's own report acknowledged no evidence against them. Relying on the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), the court reiterated that compulsory administration of such tests violates the constitutional guarantee against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) as well as the right to personal liberty and mental privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court said such tests may be conducted only after obtaining voluntary and informed consent, recorded before a judicial magistrate, and with access to legal representation. The judgment serves as a reminder of the limits on police powers in the context of scientific interrogation techniques.
