Narco-Analysis tries to recall repressed materials. Procedure of Narco-analysis test:

The narco analysis test is conducted by mixing 3 grams of sodium penthol or sodium amytal dissolved in 3000ml of distilled water. Personal consent of the subject is also required.

It is established that in of the total number of the individuals subjected for narco analysis are found to be innocent. Pros and Cons of Narco Analysis Test:

According to police Narco analysis is a scientific tool of investigation, it helps a lot in crime prevention and detection. The test can be misused by suggestive questioning by the investigating agencies. Constitutional Validity:

Some legal experts consider that narco analysis test during the investigation is a blatant violation of Art. Art. The test also goes against the maxim “Nomo tenetur se Ipsum Accusare” which means no man not even the accused himself can be compelled to answer any question, which may tend to prove him guilty of a crime of which he has been accused. It was held that the right extends to witness & the accused alike. The expression ‘accused of any offence’ must mean formally accused in presenti not in futuro. By administration of narco analysis test, forcible intrusion into one’s mind is being restored to, thereby nullifying the validity & legitimacy of the Right to Silence.

It is an accepted legal position that the protection of Art. The accused has no choice against the court order. The Madras High Court in Dinesh Dalmia v. State of Madras held that subjecting an accused to undergo such scientific tests would not amount to breaking his silence by force. When the human rights activist adopt third degree methods to extract information from the accused, it is high time the investigating agency took recourse to scientific methods of investigation.

The Bombay High Court in Abdul Karim Telgi case held that “certain physical tests involving minimal bodily harm” like narco analysis test and brain mapping does not violate Art. The important point is that the confession or statement made during narco analysis is not admissible as evidence in a court of law, and that is the reason why the protection against self-incrimination under Art. The issue required to be settled by a court decision because Mr. Rao refused to sign the consent form & hence the Forensic Laboratory at Gandhinagar declined to conduct a narco analysis test without a duly filled and signed consent form. The Supreme Court verdict is still awaited.

The issue of using narco analysis test as a tool of investigation in India has been widely debated. To uphold this principle narco analysis test has to be made compulsory in cases where the interest of public is involved.