Lie detector tests, also known as polygraph tests, play a vital role in criminal investigations by assessing the veracity of a suspect's statements. These tests monitor physiological responses such as blood pressure, heart rate, respiration, and skin conductivity in response to questions posed to the individual.
Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution provides essential protections against self-incrimination. It asserts that no person accused of any offense shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. This safeguard is critical in maintaining the fairness and integrity of legal proceedings, ensuring that confessions or admissions are not coerced from individuals.
In the pivotal case of Selvi vs. State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court ruled decisively that lie detector tests should only be conducted with the consent of the accused. This ruling not only reinforced the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) but also highlighted the importance of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Lie detector tests are often surrounded by controversy due to their questionable reliability and potential for misuse. Critics point out that these tests can yield false positives, where innocent individuals may be incorrectly identified as deceptive. Additionally, some individuals might manipulate their physiological responses, raising concerns about the integrity of the results. The pressure associated with being tested could also lead to false confessions, further complicating the issue.
According to the guidelines established by the Supreme Court, lie detector tests can only be administered with the informed consent of the individual, which must be freely given and documented in the presence of a judicial magistrate. It is imperative that the individual is thoroughly informed about the procedure, its implications, and their rights, including the right to legal counsel.
The Supreme Court's ruling carries significant implications for law enforcement practices in India. It restricts the use of lie detector tests to cases where individuals have voluntarily consented, thus ensuring the protection of privacy rights and the right against self-incrimination. This decision encourages law enforcement agencies to focus on investigative methods that respect constitutional rights.
Failure to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling may lead to the exclusion of any evidence obtained through a lie detector test conducted without consent. Additionally, such non-compliance could result in legal challenges and human rights violations, potentially eroding public trust in law enforcement and the judicial system.
"Justice served with compassion and adherence to the law strengthens the fabric of democracy." This quote emphasizes the critical role of civil servants in upholding justice and constitutional law, ensuring that every action taken respects the rights and dignity of individuals.
Kutos : AI Assistant!
