Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Demanding Complainants Be Asked About Willingness To Undergo Narco Analysis, Polygraph Test

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking directions on the Delhi Police to ask the complainants if they are willing to undergo scientific tests like Narco Analysis and Brain Mapping during the investigation to prove the allegations.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the plea moved by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.

Dismissing the plea, the bench said that it is well settled that courts do not interfere with the investigation as investigation is purely the domain of investigating agency.

“The prayer which is sought for by the Petitioner in the present PIL, if accepted, can result in further humiliation of the complainant, more so if the complainant is a lady for whom special protection/provisions have been made in the Cr.P.C. It is for the investigating agencies to uncover the truth,” the court observed.

Upadhyay’s plea also sought a direction on the Police to ask the accused if they are willing to undergo such scientific tests to prove the innocence and record statement in the chargesheet, in order to “reduce police investigation time and precious judicial time.”

A direction was also sought on the Law Commission of India to examine the “best practices of developed countries” and prepare a detailed report to control “fake cases.”

The court observed that the issue regarding the reliability of brain mapping test, polygraph test, Narco analysis, lie detector tests, etc. is “still under lot of debate” and a writ of mandamus cannot be passed to the authorities to conduct such tests in order to ascertain the veracity of the complainant.

“If, after investigation, the police finds that no case is made out against the accused, the Police can file a closure report under Section 174 Cr.P.C. The Constitution provides for special provisions for an accused. In case of a false complaint there are other remedies which are available in law. In view of the above, a complainant definitely cannot be forced to go through deception detection tests such as brain mapping test, polygraph test, narco analysis, lie detector tests, etc. to ascertain the veracity of the complaint before the investigation starts against the accused,” the court said.

The bench also added that the 277th Report of the Law Commission, which was relied upon by Upadhyay, only states that there has to be a more effective mechanism and special legal provisions to adequately compensate an accused who is a victim of wrongful prosecution. 

“This certainly does not mean that a victim or a complainant must be forced to undergo scientific tests like Narco Analysis, Polygraphy and Brain mapping and satisfy the police that the complaint is genuine before the investigation starts,” the court said.

The court had reserved its verdict on May 15. During the hearing, the Chief Justice had orally said: “Mazak thodi hai. CrPC hai sahab (It is not a joke. It is CrPC). Kaha likha hua hai ki ek vakya (sentence) aur puch skte hai? We won’t go beyond CrPC. Please show us that this is mandatory provision in CrPC that the police is required to ask [the complainant]? We are not lawmakers.”

In his plea, Upadhyay had contended that narco-analysis does not amount to compulsion as it is a mere process of extracting information through disinhibition.

“Petitioner submits that one can seek protection under Article 20(3) when he is charged with an offense and forced to be a witness against himself but recording her statement “whether she is willing to undergo Narco Analysis, Polygraphy and Brain mapping test to prove her allegation or innocence” won’t offend Article 20(3),” the plea stated.

Title: Aswini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 540

Click Here To Read Order