Constitutional Validity of Scientific Interrogation Techniques in India: An Analysis of Narco-Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping Tests

Narco-analysis, often described as a “truth serum” technique, has emerged as a controversial tool in criminal investigations, particularly in India. This study critically examines the scientific validity, legal permissibility, and constitutional implications of narco-analysis within the framework of Indian criminal jurisprudence. While projected as a modern alternative to coercive interrogation methods, narco-analysis raises serious concerns regarding reliability, voluntariness, and the protection of fundamental rights. The research traces the historical evolution and pharmacological basis of narco-analysis, highlighting its inherent limitations, including suggestibility, hallucinations, and the risk of false or distorted responses. It further analyzes the doctrine of self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, along with the closely related rights to silence and privacy under Article 21. Judicial interpretations, particularly in Selvi v. State of Karnataka, have been examined to establish that involuntary administration of such techniques constitutes testimonial compulsion and violates personal liberty. The study also evaluates the evidentiary inadmissibility of statements obtained through narco-analysis under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, while addressing the limited and controversial scope of derivative use under Section 27. A comparative analysis of legal positions in jurisdictions such as the United States and the United Kingdom further reinforces the global reluctance to accept such techniques due to their coercive and unreliable nature. Ultimately, the research concludes that narco-analysis, despite its perceived investigative utility, is incompatible with constitutional safeguards, scientific standards, and principles of fair trial. It advocates for stricter legal regulation, enhanced reliance on conventional forensic methods, and the prioritization of human rights in criminal investigations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Iconic Research and Engineering Journals
Published
2026-05-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64388/irev9i11-1717791
Primary Topic
Deception detection and forensic psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Constitutional Validity of Scientific Interrogation Techniques in India: An Analysis of Narco-Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping Tests

Yestin Gautam
Iconic Research and Engineering Journals
Deception detection and forensic psychology
article

Constitutional Validity of Scientific Interrogation Techniques in India: An Analysis of Narco-Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping Tests

Yestin Gautam
article en

Abstract

Narco-analysis, often described as a “truth serum” technique, has emerged as a controversial tool in criminal investigations, particularly in India. This study critically examines the scientific validity, legal permissibility, and constitutional implications of narco-analysis within the framework of Indian criminal jurisprudence. While projected as a modern alternative to coercive interrogation methods, narco-analysis raises serious concerns regarding reliability, voluntariness, and the protection of fundamental rights. The research traces the historical evolution and pharmacological basis of narco-analysis, highlighting its inherent limitations, including suggestibility, hallucinations, and the risk of false or distorted responses. It further analyzes the doctrine of self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, along with the closely related rights to silence and privacy under Article 21. Judicial interpretations, particularly in Selvi v. State of Karnataka, have been examined to establish that involuntary administration of such techniques constitutes testimonial compulsion and violates personal liberty. The study also evaluates the evidentiary inadmissibility of statements obtained through narco-analysis under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, while addressing the limited and controversial scope of derivative use under Section 27. A comparative analysis of legal positions in jurisdictions such as the United States and the United Kingdom further reinforces the global reluctance to accept such techniques due to their coercive and unreliable nature. Ultimately, the research concludes that narco-analysis, despite its perceived investigative utility, is incompatible with constitutional safeguards, scientific standards, and principles of fair trial. It advocates for stricter legal regulation, enhanced reliance on conventional forensic methods, and the prioritization of human rights in criminal investigations.

Iconic Research and Engineering JournalsVol. 9(11)
Amity University (AE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Deception detection and forensic psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Constitutional Validity of Scientific Interrogation Techniques in India: An Analysis of Narco-Analysis, Polygraph and Brain Mapping Tests — Yestin Gautam · Iconic Research and Engineering Journals (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS