Selvi v State of Karnataka (2010) held that
ASuch tests are conclusive proof of guilt
BSuch tests are barred even with consent
CNarcoanalysis, polygraph and brain mapping tests are admissible without consent
DCompulsory use of narcoanalysis, polygraph and BEAP tests violates Article 20(3) (self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to privacy / mental autonomy); they may only be conducted with INFORMED CONSENT, and even then results are admissible only as derivative evidence not as confessions
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: D. Compulsory use of narcoanalysis, polygraph and BEAP tests violates Article 20(3) (self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to privacy / mental autonomy); they may only be conducted with INFORMED CONSENT, and even then results are admissible only as derivative evidence not as confessions
Selvi extended Article 20(3) to non-verbal communicative testimony obtained from a coerced mind. Consent permits the test but does not elevate the result to direct evidence — it remains a lead for further investigation.
Related questions
The 'arrest memo' procedure mandated by DK Basu v West Bengal (1997) requiresManeka Gandhi v UoI (1978) imported into Article 21 the requirement that the 'procedure esSection 207 CrPC requires the Magistrate, in cases instituted on a police report, to furniIn Manubhai Ratilal Patel v State of Gujarat (2013), the Supreme Court reiterated that the'Presumption of innocence' in Indian criminal jurisprudence'Anticipatory bail' under Section 438 CrPC is available to a personConstitutional protection under Article 22(2) (production before magistrate within 24 hourSection 357 CrPC empowers the trial court to order