The Supreme Court ruled that involuntary narco-analysis tests violate Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution, affirming that such tests and information derived from them are inadmissible as sole evidence for conviction. While voluntary tests with safeguards are permissible, their results alone cannot lead to conviction. An accused has a right to voluntarily undergo the test during trial, but it’s not an indefeasible right; the court must assess all circumstances, including free consent and safeguards. The Court emphasized that a bail application should not involve ordering such involuntary investigative techniques.
Facts Of The Case:
A First Information Report (FIR No. 545 of 2022) was registered on August 24, 2022, at P.S. Mahua, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the Appellant (husband) and his family. The complainant alleged that her sister, who married the Appellant on December 11, 2020, was subjected to repeated dowry demands and beatings. On August 22, 2022, the Appellant informed the complainant that her sister had run away from their matrimonial home. Despite searching, the sister could not be located, leading the complainant to suspect foul play by the accused.Conversely, the Appellant claimed that on August 21, 2022, his wife disembarked from a bus at Baabali Chawk for a nature’s call while en route to Ayodhya and never returned. He filed a missing person complaint (GD No. 038) on August 28, 2022, at P.S. Jahangir Ganj. The missing person (wife) has not been found to date. The Appellant’s mother, father, and brothers were granted bail by the High Court of Judicature at Patna.The Appellant’s request for regular bail was denied by the Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, on August 1, 2023, based on the FIR allegations and confessional statements of co-accused, who claimed to have thrown the missing person into the Saryu river on the night of August 21-22, 2022. Dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the High Court, which, in an interim order dated November 9, 2023, accepted the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahua’s submission to conduct narco-analysis tests on all accused and witnesses during the investigation. The Appellant challenged this order before the Supreme Court.
Procedural History:
The genesis of the appeal lies in FIR No. 545 of 2022, registered on August 24, 2022, at P.S. Mahua, against the Appellant and his family under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant’s request for regular bail was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, on August 1, 2023, in B.P. No. 1141 of 2023. Subsequently, the Appellant filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 71293 of 2023 before the High Court of Judicature at Patna seeking regular bail. On November 9, 2023, the High Court issued an impugned interim order accepting the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahua’s submission to conduct narco-analysis tests on all accused persons, including the Appellant, and other witnesses. Aggrieved by this order, the Appellant filed the present appeal before the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal. During the proceedings, on April 22, 2025, the Supreme Court appointed Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Senior Advocate, as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court with the complex issues involved. The Supreme Court heard arguments from the learned counsel for the Appellant, the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent State, and the learned Amicus Curiae. Following the arguments and a thorough review, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on June 9, 2025, setting aside the High Court’s impugned order. The bail application of the Appellant, if still pending, is to be decided in accordance with law.
READ ALSO :Supreme Court Strikes Down Kerala’s Preventive Detention Order: A Win for Personal Liberty
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court’s acceptance of the Investigating Officer’s submission to conduct narco-analysis tests on all accused persons directly contravened the Selvi judgment, which protects personal liberty and the right against self-incrimination under Articles 21 and 20(3) of the Constitution. The Court stated that involuntary narco-analysis tests are impermissible, and their results or subsequently discovered information are not per se admissible as evidence. It also criticized the High Court for accepting such a submission during a bail application, noting that bail adjudications should not involve roving inquiries or involuntary investigative techniques. The Court reiterated that while voluntary narco-analysis tests are permissible with safeguards, their reports cannot be directly admitted as evidence, and conviction cannot be based solely on information derived from them. Finally, the Court clarified that an accused’s right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at the trial stage is not an indefeasible right, requiring the court to consider free consent and safeguards.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court ultimately held that the impugned Order dated November 9, 2023, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 71293 of 2023, could not be sustained and was therefore set aside. The Court found that the High Court erred in accepting the Investigating Officer’s submission to conduct narco-analysis tests on all accused persons, as this directly contravened the established law in Selvi v. State of Karnataka, violating Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. It was further clarified that a report of a voluntary narco-analysis test cannot form the sole basis of conviction, even with safeguards, and any information discovered subsequently can only be admitted with the aid of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and requires supporting evidence. The Court also clarified that while an accused has a right to voluntarily undergo a narco-analysis test at the trial stage, it is not an indefeasible right, and the concerned court must consider all surrounding circumstances, including free consent and appropriate safeguards, before authorizing such a test. The bail application of the Appellant, if any, is to be decided in accordance with law. The appeal was allowed, and any pending applications were disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Amlesh Kumar versus The State of Bihar Citation: 2025 INSC 810 Criminal/Civil Appeal No.:(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.5392 of 2024) Date of Judgment: June 9, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Sanjay Karol & Prasanna B. Varale
Download The Judgement Here