Supreme Court upholds 18-month sentence of advocate Sanjay Rathore for insulting a woman judge in court, reinforcing judicial decorum and women’s safety.
SC QUASHES PATNA HIGH COURT’S ORDER ON NARCO-ANALYSIS IN BAIL CASE
CASE SUMMARY – In Amlesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court addressed the legality of ordering narco-analysis tests during a bail hearing. The Patna High Court had allowed such a test without consent, violating Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. Amlesh Kumar’s wife went missing in August 2022 under suspicious circumstances after repeated dowry harassment. Her family alleged foul play, leading to the registration of an FIR against Amlesh and his relatives under multiple IPC sections. The accused claimed she disappeared during a journey to Ayodhya and filed a missing report days later. Despite investigations, the woman remains untraced, and co-accused allegedly confessed to disposing of her body in a river. So in this case the Court reaffirmed the principles in Selvi v. State of Karnataka, holding that such tests cannot be conducted involuntarily, nor used solely to convict an accused. Voluntary narco-analysis is allowed only with strict safeguards and at the trial stage. The Court set aside the High Court’s order, allowing the appeal and directing fresh consideration of the bail application.
SC QUASHES PATNA HIGH COURT’S ORDER ON NARCO-ANALYSIS IN BAIL CASE
| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Amlesh Kumar vs. The State of Bihar |
| Introduction | Appeal challenging Patna High Court’s acceptance of the police’s submission to conduct narco-analysis on accused persons, allegedly violating fundamental rights. |
| Factual Background | FIR lodged against Amlesh Kumar and family under IPC for dowry harassment and missing wife. Narco test ordered during bail hearing without consent. |
| Legal Issues | 1. Legality of High Court accepting police’s submission for narco test
2. Whether voluntary narco can be sole basis of conviction 3. Right to request narco test |
| Applicable Law | Article 20(3) & Article 21 of Constitution, Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act, Section 439 CrPC, Judgment in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) |
| Analysis | High Court erred; involuntary narco violates constitutional rights. Voluntary narco test cannot solely determine guilt. No indefeasible right exists to demand one. |
| Conclusion | SC set aside the Patna HC order; emphasized voluntary narco only at trial stage with safeguards. Bail application to be reviewed per law. |
| Current Scenario | Appeal allowed. HC order nullified. Bail decision pending. Court reiterated strict compliance with Selvi guidelines for scientific tests. |
“No individual should be forcibly subjected to any of the techniques in question… doing so would amount to an unwarranted intrusion into personal liberty.”
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ALSO READ – Article 21 of Constitution
