 |
|
The recent denial of the CBI's request to perform a narco-analysis on Sanjay Roy, the main accused in the R G Kar rape and murder case, highlights the complex legal and ethical considerations surrounding this controversial investigative technique. The case underscores the delicate balance between securing justice and safeguarding individual rights, particularly the right against self-incrimination and privacy.
Narco-analysis, also known as a 'truth serum' test, involves the administration of intravenous drugs, such as sodium pentothal, scopolamine, and sodium amytal, to induce a hypnotic trance-like state. The theory behind this method is that under the influence of these drugs, individuals become more uninhibited and less likely to withhold information, potentially revealing crucial details about the crime. While narco-analysis has been used in various investigations, its effectiveness and reliability have been widely debated. Critics argue that the technique can lead to false confessions or unreliable information, as individuals may be vulnerable to suggestion or manipulation under the influence of drugs.
The Supreme Court of India, in the landmark case of 'Selvi & Ors. vs State of Karnataka' (2010), ruled that the use of narco-analysis, brain mapping, and polygraph tests on suspects without their consent is unconstitutional. This decision recognized the importance of protecting the right against self-incrimination, enshrined in Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, as well as the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21. The court emphasized that no individual should be forced to undergo these investigative methods against their will, regardless of the context.
While the Supreme Court's ruling prohibits forced narco-analysis, the denial of the CBI's request in the R G Kar case is particularly noteworthy. Even though Sanjay Roy had refused consent for the procedure, the CBI's attempt to utilize this method raises concerns about the potential for investigative agencies to circumvent the court's ruling. Furthermore, the court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring due process and protecting the rights of the accused throughout criminal investigations. The court's role in safeguarding these rights is essential to uphold the principles of fairness and justice within the legal system.
It is crucial to consider the broader implications of this case. The denial of the CBI's request to perform narco-analysis on Sanjay Roy underscores the limitations of such methods and the need for a cautious and balanced approach to their use in investigations. While there may be situations where such techniques could potentially yield valuable information, it is paramount that any use of these methods be conducted ethically, respect the rights of the individual, and be subject to rigorous oversight by judicial authorities.