Constitutional Validity of Narco Analysis Essay Example
Constitutional Validity of Narco Analysis Essay Example

Constitutional Validity of Narco Analysis Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 3 (771 words)
  • Published: March 14, 2017
  • Type: Essay
View Entire Sample
Text preview

The issue of the constitutional legitimacy of Narcoanalysis has garnered substantial interest due to the conflict between the need for an effective investigation and safeguarding personal freedoms. Thus, it is crucial that we explore the potential consequences of authorizing these questionable techniques in diverse situations. Issues have been brought up relating to cases where people involved in an investigation, whether as suspects, defendants or witnesses, have undergone these procedures without their agreement.

The defense for these procedures includes referencing the crucial need to obtain information that could assist investigative bodies in forestalling future criminal actions, especially in situations where collecting evidence through conventional methods is challenging. Certain verdicts under scrutiny have depended on specific aspects of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, indicating the duties conferred upon citizens to completely co

...

operate with investigative entities.

It has been suggested that the utilization of these strategies does not cause physical damage and the data collected will solely be used to support investigative processes. Such information won't be deemed as proof in legal proceedings. The assertion is that improving fact-finding quality during investigation can lead to a rise in both convictions and dismissals. Moreover, it's posited that these scientific methods offer a softer alternative to the regrettable and allegedly common use of 'third degree methods' by investigators.

The mandatory implementation of the challenged techniques poses inquiries regarding the protective range of the `right against self-incrimination' that is established in Article 20(3) of our Constitution. It is declared in one of the disputed judgments that the data obtained through techniques like `polygraph examination' and the `Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) test' cannot be identified as `testimonia

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

compulsion' because the person being tested is not obligated to supply verbal responses. This places it beyond the protective ambit of Article 20(3).

The court also established that any spoken revelations during a narcoanalysis test do not violate Article 20(3) as their incriminating or exonerating implications are not apparent when conducting the test. To understand these and other related issues, it is crucial to investigate the historical roots and reasoning behind the 'right against self-incrimination'.

The key inquiries to be addressed include the extension of this right to the phase of investigation and if the outcomes of such tests can be classified as 'testimonial' in nature, thus calling for the safeguarding provisions of Article 20(3). In addition, it is important to assess if using these test findings or resources obtained through these tests may reasonably raise the risk of incrimination for the individual being tested. Lastly, we should also consider arguments related to the assurance of 'substantive due process', which is intrinsically tied to the concept of 'personal liberty' as protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The initial inquiry connected to this involves whether the tenets set out in the Code of Criminal Procedure from 1973, related to 'medical examination' during an inquiry, can be broadly interpreted to encompass contentious methods, despite these not being specifically listed. To respond to this, an exploration of the guidelines that determine the construal of laws in the context of scientific progress is necessary. Moreover, the subject of professional ethics of medical staff participating in implementing these procedures can also be scrutinized.

Additionally, the scope of Article 21 has been legally broadened to incorporate the 'right against harsh, degrading or inhuman treatment'.

This obligates us to assess if the forced implementation of the questioned techniques infringes this right, which aligns with evolving international human rights standards. We also need to ponder arguments that bring up the test subject's 'right to privacy' in both a physical and psychological context. The scientific credibility of the challenged techniques has been doubted and debates have emerged that their outcomes may not be completely dependable.

For example, the method of narcoanalysis includes the intravenous injection of sodium pentothal, a substance that reduces the inhibitions of the individual and encourages open conversation. Still, research indicates that the truths unveiled through drug application may not always be correct. These methods are fundamentally used for validation purposes where conclusions are based on the physical responses of the individual. Nevertheless, the validity of these techniques has been constantly challenged in various research studies.

Within the realm of criminal trials, the credibility of scientific evidence is directly related to numerous aspects of a just trial. This includes the necessary level of substantiating guilt without reasonable doubt, and the defendant's entitlement to put forth a defense. These considerations are fundamental constituents of 'personal freedom', as defined in Article 21 of the Constitution, and should not be taken lightly. Thus, it would be beneficial to gain some understanding concerning the acceptability of scientific evidence.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New