Detailed Study Of Narco Analysis Test With Reference To the Right Against Self-Incrimination

Background And Scope?

The origin of the term narco stemmed from the Greek work “NARKE”. It is best used in describing a psychotherapeutic technique for diagnosing mental details. The method applied in this procedure is psychotropic capsules to introduce stupor suspension or a considerable decline in sensibility (or investigating company). [1]The Narco test is also used as a lie detector or truth system test.

The usage of expertise and tech in the detection and prosecution of crimes becomes the demand of the community these days when looking at crime figures and crime strategy statistics; however, we do not escape from the implications that could arise while utilizing these innovations.[2]

Horseley invented the concept of narco-analysis. Narco-analysis raises many concerns about the nexus between regulation, medicine, and ethics. Is the narco-analysis protocol a blatant desecration of the Constitution’s privileges under Article 20(3) of the privileges? The news recently turned into an eye for storm and struck the debate when the media spurged it during the case of Munnar, accused of being subject to the narco-analysis evaluation, while the judicial system requested Narco for the fairness and the religion.

Implementing the narco-analysis evaluation concerns the fundamental issue of justice and basic human rights. The legality of using this method as a research aid poses real questions, such as the intrusion of the privileges, freedoms, and freedoms of a person. In the case of Bombay v. Kathikalu[3], the accused must be seen that his assertion is suspicious of himself. Powerfulness implies coercion, including threats or incarceration of a person’s wife, parent, or kid. Therefore, whether the perpetrator confessed, art 20(3) is not applicable without inducement, coercion, or pledge. The privilege against auto-incrimination allows individual privacy and civilization principles in criminal justice enforcement to be maintained. It also contravenes the “Nemo Tenetur se Ipsum Accusare” maxim that “no one, even the defendant himself, can be forced to address any query that can tendencies to prove him guilty of a crime he was accused of.” The Court should be refused whether the confession of the guilty stems from some physical or spiritual coercion (whether it is under the hypnotic state of mind).[4] The Right to Silence is enshrined in the code of criminal procedure and the Indian Constitution against involuntary self-inculpation.

As far as the Narco-Analysis Test is involved, the injection of a chemical known as “sodium pentothal” into the body of the proposed suspect or subject is carried out. The specialist’s questions are carefully framed, others are replicated, and the comments made during the hypnotic trance are registered.

Concept of Narco Analysis in India

Some democratic countries, especially India, still use narco-analysis. In most advanced and democratic nations, narco-analysis is not freely allowed for forensic purposes. In India, a team of anesthetic specialists, psychiatrists, psychiatric psychologists, audio-video artists, and supportive nursing personnel were involved in the Narco examination. The investigative psychologist will prepare the revelation study with a portable audiovisual tape disc. Where required, polygraph and brain imaging testing was used to check the strength of the revelations further[5].

In Narco analyses, trials, court cases, and labs are constantly used in India. In Bombay v Kathi Kalu Oghad[6], the decision of an eleven-judge bench was found to relay facts dependent on individual personal experience, which cannot simply cover the mechanical method of generating documents in Court. The plaintiff’s confession was found constitutionally inadmissible in the case of Townsend v. Sain[7]in the United States because the petitioner’s will was communicated by a drug owned by an authentic serum when the authorities took it forward.

The process of obtaining facts from criminals through narco-analysis will prove to be of considerable value to the investigation and intervention in India, where the difference between the prosecution rate and the indictment rate is very high. It is well known that in?Nandini Sathpathy vs. P.L.Dani case, the judges opined that[8]the right to secrecy was given to the suspect by default of the declaration; no one can physically obtain announcements from the suspects, who possess the right to stay silent throughout the development of the questioning (investigation).

The Interplay Between Narco-Analysis And Article 20 (3)

In a democracy like India, the essence of the narco analysis test can be understood with the numerous legal issues it brings about in the general course of the investigation. The test also has specific parameters that are considered intrusive to the rights imparted under article 20 (3) of the Indian Constitution. Article 20 (3) reads, “no person accused of any offense shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.” It points toward the modality that the right so mentioned is

a) Accessible to only the accused: The provision prevents a convicted party from producing testimony / becoming a witness against himself only and not others. This provision is also sometimes referred to as the freedom of self-incrimination. In the case of an “accused individual,” narco-analysis would attract Article 20(3). However, is Article 20(3) attracted if the same is done to the suspect? Similarly, in the case of Andhra Pradesh v. Smt. Ina Puri Padma[9], a negative was replied, according to which the Court believed that Article 20(3) did not include criminals and therefore approved the studies carried out by those persons.

b) A defense mechanism in contradiction of coercion to be a witness against himself: Since the individual’s permission should be secured in advancing the test, the issue of compulsion as such does not occur. What happens if such permission is sought vigorously or through bullying? It is prudent to mandatorily provide a query to resolve certain circumstances as to whether or not the consent is freely available during the post-barbiturate questioning session[10]. The concern may emerge as to whether or not Article 20(3) will hit a confession by one convicted. In another benchmark decision, the Supreme Court held that Article 20(3) was not applicable when the accused rendered a confession without incitement, coercion, or undertaking.[11]

c) A precaution for the accused, contrary to the obligation of providing evidence against himself: Within this head, there?are just self-discriminatory comments that have been explained thoroughly. If it is incriminatory or not, the meaning of the argument may be decided only after, and not before, the end of the evaluation. In the Ramchandra Ram Reddy v State of Maharashtra,[12] the Court held that tests such as narco-analysis do not breach Article 20(3) by observing whether narco-analytical claims are auto-incriminatory; they can be established only at the end and not before. In order to avoid the inclusion of any allegations made in the context of the examination, there are, in addition, adequate provisions under the Indian Evidence Act 1872[13], The code of Criminal Procedure 1973[14] , and the Constitution of India. When testing is carried out under the specialist’s close oversight, the Court has excluded the risk of violating constitutional rights. In addition, the Gujarat High Court in Santosh Sharmanbhai Ladeja v. the State of Gujarat[15] justified the examination because it is carried out under the guidance of specialist doctors to ensure that the accused’s status is adequately taken after and continually monitored to minimize the danger

Right to self-incrimination: Is it against the public interest?

Another interpretation of the ethical legitimacy of Narco tests is that they are used as a means to gather information and contribute to an inquiry, thus not as a shred of compulsory evidence. It does not breach the statutory provisions on self-incrimination rights. Narcoanalytic supporters believe that narco-analysis is particularly helpful as it is necessary to obtain intelligence used to deter terrorist offenses. However, it must logically be tested such that it can be supplemented by current traditional interrogative methods, which have caused the police to be shameful and reputable and led to the reputation of the criminal justice system being eroded[16]. Narcoanalysis will emerge as a feasible alternative to barbaric procedures in the third degree. However, care must be taken that the investigation officer should not misinterpret or corrupt this practice and that it can be correlated with substantiative action[17].

Proof of thousands of depositors losing their lives and savings to the children in the case of?Charminar Bank Scam[18] shows that children and pensioners married overnight shattered their hopes and pushed them to the verge of bankruptcy and suicide. Nevertheless, he declined to go under Narco analytical protocol when the MD of Krushi Bank was nabbed. This will degrade the facts and thus deprive the people of fairness if the privilege against incrimination is enforced against the public interest.??Ironically, we use judicial proceedings in all these matters to secure people’s freedom when many people’s interests and lives are sacrificed.

The criminal justice system is concerned with the rights of persons and, in this sense, with the weaknesses in the criminal systems that contribute to the dilution of facts, a secure passage forgiven and criminalized. Although the legitimacy of the Narcoanalysis evaluation and admissibility is maintained notwithstanding the conditions in which it was performed, a little abortion of justice is possible when conducted in accordance with a specified protocol and compliance with due security measures is observed, there is little justification for the arrest of accused and the complaints[19]. When the accused / defendant has been obliged to perform a narco-analysis examination in severe offenses, the law can provide the basis for improved standards of criminal justice by expanding the system of proof[20]. This transition will result in a qualitative shift of criminal enforcement and substitute the former death chambers in police departments by theatre operating the suspects with authentic serum, thereby giving a ray of optimism that justice would ultimately lead to?triumph.

Conclusion

The examination for narco analysis is focused on the idea that a human being may deceive in his imagination, which is blocked or defused by directing the individual into a half-aware state under the influence of such barbiturates. Since such experimental experiments require the use of sophisticated technology, well-developed rules and regulations are essential to carry out specific studies following the criminal law of the nation. Around the same period, the regulatory system must ensure that innovations and progress of research are taken into consideration, provided they do not infringe fundamental legal values and are in the interest of society. The scheme regarding the justice system should be focused on just and fair laws.

Since Narco Analysis is not “too accurate,” its importance and relevance cannot be denied in any manner in the present scenario. On the other side, the test attacks explicitly the fundamental right established in Article 20(3) and the expanded sense of art 21 of the Constitution, which is the accurate and guided review of the central case using the scientific techniques of development, including Narco Analysis. The scope and distribution of its importance must also be resolved. The Supreme Court has yet reached no definite opinion on this. This essay examines the importance of Narco Analysis for the prosecution of crime and numerous associated topics such as constitutional, human rights, and ethics.

?

References

[1] Sourodip Nandy & Himanshu Garg, 'Constitutionality of Narco Analysis and Polygraph Examination', (2019) < https://www.ijlmh.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Constitutionality-of-Narco-Analysis-and-Polygraph-Examination-1.pdf> accessed on 4 June 2022.

[2] Sonakshi Verma, 'The Concept Of Narcoanalysis In View Of Constitutional Law And Human Rights' 10 <https://www.rmlnlu.ac.in/webj/sonakshi_verma.pdf> accessed on 4 June 2022.

[3] State of?Bombay v.?Kathi Kalu?Oghad, AIR 1961 SC 1808.

[4] Kush Kalra And Luv Kalra, Be Your Own Lawyer – Book For Layman, Chapter 27?“Right against Self Incrimination” (Vij Books India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi, India, 2013).

[5] B.R.Sharma, Forensic Science In Criminal Investigation And Trials (Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,5th Ed.2015).

[6] Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad 1961 AIR 1808.

[7] Townsend v. Sain 372 U.S. 293.

[8] Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani AIR 1978 SC 1025.

[9] State?of Andhra Pradesh v.?Ina Puri Padma?2008 Cri L J 3992.

[10] Kalawati and Anr. v. The State of Himachal Pradesh 1953 AIR 131.

[11] State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad 1961 AIR 1808.

[12] Re Ramchandra Ram Reddy, 2004 All MR (Cri) 1704.

[13] The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, s.136, (Act No. 1 of 1872).

[14] The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, s. 156-159 (Act No. 2 of 1974).

[15] Santosh Sharmanbhai Ladeja v. State of Gujarat, 2007 CriLJ 4566.

[16] Shruti Chaudhary, ‘Indian Criminal Justice System and Human Rights’, (2018) Vol 3 Issue 1 IJARnD 271 <https://www.ijarnd.com/manuscripts/v3i1/V3I1-1206.pdf> accessed on 4 June 2022.

[17] Vasudha, ‘Scientific-Evidence-The-New-Hot-Potato-in-the-Vernacular-of-Criminal-Case-Investigation.pdf', <https://www.ijlmh.com/wp-content/uploads/Scientific-Evidence-The-New-Hot-Potato-in-the-Vernacular-of-Criminal-Case-Investigation.pdf >accessed on 4 June 2022.

[18] Wasy Shakeel Ansari v. The Managing Director, Charminar Bank (The Charminar Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd.,) 2016 (2) ALT 135.

[19] Suresh Bada Math, ‘Supreme Court judgment on polygraph, narco-analysis & brain-mapping: A boon or a ban’, (2011) 134 (1) IJMR 4-7 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171915/> accessed on 4 June 2022.

[20] Jaising P Modi, Modi A Textbook Of Medical Jurisprudence And Toxicology (Lexis Nexis,25th Ed.2016) 448-450.