Consent to Narco-Analysis Test Can Be Withdrawn Before It Is Administered: Rajasthan High Court

An FIR (No. 375/2014) was registered at Police Station Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The investigating officer asked the Judicial Magistrate, Chirawa, for permission to conduct a narco-analysis test on the petitioner, who consented. On 18.05.2015 the Magistrate allowed the application and directed him to appear for the test on 23.05.2015 (para 6). On 06.07.2015 he applied to withdraw his consent, saying he could not be compelled to be a witness against himself; it was rejected on 09.07.2015 (paras 5, 7). The Public Prosecutor argued that consent, once given, could not be revoked (para 8). The question was whether consent to the test can be withdrawn before it is administered (para 4).

The order opens with a discussion of the right to remain silent, rooted in the maxim "nemo debet prodere ipsum" and guaranteed by Article 20(3) (opening paragraphs). Consent to a narco test must be free, informed and voluntary (para 3). Under the larger-bench ruling in Selvi, no one may be forcibly subjected to these techniques, and even the results of a consented test cannot be admitted in evidence; the Court reproduced Selvi's conclusions with the NHRC guidelines, which require consent to be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate (para 10). The Magistrate had refused the withdrawal not on merits but on the technical ground that the petitioner had consented himself (para 11). Under Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, even an accused who seeks a narco test has no indefeasible right to it; the court must weigh free consent and safeguards (paras 12-14). A suspect has the full right to deny consent before or during the recording, so the test cannot be conducted against his will (paras 15-16). An involuntary test suppresses free will, and anything obtained from it is inadmissible (para 17). Refusing the withdrawal would therefore amount to a forced test (para 18).