Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
:
Name of the Hon'ble Judges
K.G. Balakrishnan,
C.J R.V. Raveendran and
J.M. Panchal, JJ
Facts of the case
Kavita wife of Shivkumar and daughter of Selvi
Murugesan an MLA of Tamil Nadu lodged an FIR
about the murder of her husband by her parents an
their friend.
She had charged her parents for the murder as she had
made love marriage against the wishes of her parents.
The victim was kidnapped and found murdered the
very next day .
The head of the victim was smashed with a boulder
and could be recognized through the driving license.
Facts cont.
As the case was dependent on the circumstancial
evidence the police asked the permission of the court
to undergo polygraph test and the brain mapping test
of the suspects.
It couldn’t provide the straight results so the court
asked the permission for the narco analysis and it was
granted.
The suspects challenged this decision in the Karnataka
high court, but failed to get relief.
They then went in appeal to the supreme court.
Legal issues involved
Whether the involuntary administration of the
impugned techniques violates the `right against self-
incrimination' enumerated in Article 20(3) of the
Constitution.
Whether the results derived from the impugned
techniques amount to `testimonial compulsion'
thereby attracting the bar of Article 20(3)
Whether the involuntary administration of the
impugned techniques is a reasonable restriction on
`personal liberty' as understood in the context of
Article 21 of the Constitution
Arguments under the case:
Arguments by the Appellants
The person being interrogated could possibly make
self-incriminating statements on account of
apprehensions that these techniques will extract the
truth, It is a settled principle that a statement obtained
through coercion, threat or inducement is involuntary
and hence inadmissible as evidence during trial.
A subject is encouraged to speak in a drug-induced
state, thus it amounts to testimonial compulsion.
Arguments cont.
The provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 that
provide for `medical examination' during the course of
investigation cannot be read expansively to include the
impugned techniques.