Scribd
Upload
264 views4 pages

Case Comment Selvi v. State of Karnataka

This document provides a summary of the 2010 Supreme Court of India case Selvi v. State of Karnataka. It discusses that the case examined whether tests like narco-analysis, brain mapping, and polygraph tests could be conducted without consent during criminal investigations. The Supreme Court ruled that these tests violated rights against self-incrimination under the Constitution and that any information obtained through such involuntary tests would not be admissible in court. However, the document comments that this ruling limits criminal investigations and questions how police can effectively interrogate suspects within the restrictions placed by the courts.

Uploaded by

Shivamp6
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
264 views4 pages

Case Comment Selvi v. State of Karnataka

This document provides a summary of the 2010 Supreme Court of India case Selvi v. State of Karnataka. It discusses that the case examined whether tests like narco-analysis, brain mapping, and polygraph tests could be conducted without consent during criminal investigations. The Supreme Court ruled that these tests violated rights against self-incrimination under the Constitution and that any information obtained through such involuntary tests would not be admissible in court. However, the document comments that this ruling limits criminal investigations and questions how police can effectively interrogate suspects within the restrictions placed by the courts.

Uploaded by

Shivamp6
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Page 47

Case comment on Selvi and ors. v. State of Karnataka and


Anr. (2010, 7SCC, 263)
By- Sudhanshu sachan, B.a.llb(hons.), Central University of South Bihar.

Introduction-

Case- Selvi and ors. v. State of Karnataka and Anr. (2010, 7SCC, 263)

Parties- Selvi (Appellant), State of Karnataka(Defendant)

Judges- K.G. Balakrishnan C.J.I and R.V. Raveendran J. and J.M. Panchal J.

Court- The Supreme Court of India


The case of Selvi v. State of Kerela will have affect on the upcoming decisions of the
judiciary. One important thing to note is that many of the High Courts have allowed the use
of tests such as Narco-analysis, BEAP and others during investigation but Supreme Court
through this judgement has put a stop on it. This shows a contradiction between the High
Courts and the Supreme Court of the country while dealing with the same issue. In this case
also the High Court had allowed the use of such tests for investigation. But the accused went
in appeal and the Supreme Court held that such tests without the consent of the person may
lead to false information and miscarriage of justice.

Facts of the case-


1. Selvi’s daughter Kavita had married Shivkumar who was of a different caste against
the wishes of her family.
2. Shivkumar was brutally killed in 2004 and Selvi and two others were held to be the
main suspects.
3. The prosecution only had the circumstantial evidence to prove the suspects guilty.
4. So they asked permission from the court to conduct polygraphy and brain-mapping
tests of the suspects.
5. The court granted permission. The results were not convincing to the prosecutors and
so they sought permission from the court for conducting Narco-analysis test.
6. The court granted permission. The suspects contended against this in the Karnataka
High Court. But the High Court rejected the plea.
7. The suspects then appealed in the Honourable Supreme Court and the court accepted
their plea.
Issues raised in the case-
1. Is the use of tests like brain-mapping, BEAP, narco-analysis and FMRI(Functional
Magnetic Resonance Imaging) violation of Article 20(3)(self-incrimination) of the
Constitution of India and Section 161(2) of Code of Criminal Procdure,1973?
2. Are these tests also in contravention with Article 21(Right to privacy) of the
Constitution of India?

Holdings and rule of law applied-


1. Article 20 in the Constitution of India, 1949.
2. Article 21 in the Constitution of India, 1949.
3. Section 53 and 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
4. Section 27, 53, 73 and 161 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872.

Judgement-
1. For the first issue it was held that the use of these tests is violation of Article20 (3) of
the Constitution of India.
The right against self-incrimination’ is now viewed as an essential safeguard in
criminal procedure. Its underlying rationale broadly corresponds with two objectives-
one is that of ensuring reliability of the statements made by an accused, and secondly,
ensuring that such statements are made voluntarily. If the statements are not made
voluntarily then there are higher chances that the statement might be false and
therefore it would lead to miscarriage of justice.
2. For the second issue it was held that the use of these techniques is a violation of Right
to privacy enshrined in Article 21of the Constitution of India.
“There are several ways in which the involuntary administration of either of the
impugned tests could be viewed as a restraint on ‘personal liberty’. The most obvious
indicator of restraint is the use of physical force to ensure that an unwilling person is
confined to the premises where the tests are to be conducted. Furthermore, the drug-
induced revelations or the substantive inferences drawn from the measurement of the
subject’s physiological responses can be described as an intrusion into the subject’s
mental privacy. It is also quite conceivable that a person could make an incriminating
statement on being threatened with the prospective administration of any of these
techniques. Conversely, a person who has been forcibly subjected to these techniques
could be confronted with the results in a subsequent interrogation, thereby eliciting
incriminating statements.”
3. The information acquired through these tests is not admissible in the court of law even
if the tests were performed by the consent of the person. This is because the person is
not in his senses during these tests. If any evidence or information is gathered through
such information, then that is admissible.
Case laws referred-

1. Frye v. United States, (1923) 54 App DC 46


2. Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani, (1978) 2 SCC 424
3. State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad, [1962] 3 SCR 10
4. M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, [1954] SCR 1077
5. Balkishan A. Devidayal v. State of Maharashtra, (1980) 4 SCC 600
6. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, (1978) 4 SCC 494
7. Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1963 SC 1295
8. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597

Comments-
1. The results of these tests are not completely true. They cannot be relied upon
absolutely. The information gathered through such tests shall be checked and
verified. After verification if some new evidence comes up then that can be taken
into consideration.
2. These scientific methods just provide an inclination towards a conclusion. But
completely relying on them may lead to miscarriage of justice.
3. The question left to consider is as to what extent the investigative bodies can go to
interrogate a person? Judiciary has given various protections to the convicts
through such judgements.
4. The other question left unanswered is as to how the investigation will be carried
out if the person has not consented for such tests? “The provisions in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 that provide for `medical examination' during the
course of investigation can be read expansively to include the impugned
techniques, even though the latter are not explicitly enumerated.” According to
this, the tests are justified as medical examination. How far can they use coercion
or force to investigate?
5. The concept of fair trial was also mentioned in the judgement. But what is
unfortunate is that trial has become accused centric. The victims are being
ignored. Can justice be delivered without addressing both the parties?
6. The statements observed in such tests should be relied upon because force has
been used only to make the person appear for the test. Nobody has control on what
the person will speak.
7. The information will not be a false testimony because of coercion. The court itself
has observed that the subject undergoing Narco-analysis tests are in ‘twilight
sleep’, as a consequence the subject cannot give false testimony. Similarly in
Brain-mapping, where brain catches P300 wave and Polygraph test, where
physiological changes are gauged upon that too transpires only if the subject tries
to lie. Hence, these tests are totally safe as regards ‘Rule against Involuntary
Confessions’.
Conclusion-

The judgement is impartial and full of errors. The court has gone too far in protecting the
rights of the accused. The court has told that the investigative bodies what not to do while
investigating. But it has not told what to do to investigate. The only option left to interrogate
is the use of custodial violence. India is said to be a country i.e. ‘champion of human rights.’
How by using force to interrogate makes us “champions”?

Suggestions-
1. If the court is not allowing these scientific tests then it should devise some other
ways of investigation. And if it can’t then it should allow such tests.
2. The judgements needs reconsideration as it is ambiguous and full of errors.
3. We are living in a age of science and technology. Judiciary has completely
forgotten this fact while giving this judgement. There should be inclusion of
scientific methods while interrogating.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy