Brain Mapping Test - Narco Analysis Test in India

Share on:

In the realm of criminal investigations and psychological evaluations, brain mapping, and narco analysis tests have emerged as controversial yet intriguing tools used to uncover the truth. These tests aim to delve into the subconscious mind of individuals to uncover hidden truths or memories. In India, these tests have received much attention because of the possibilities of applying these tests for solving different criminal cases but their use raises significant legal and ethical questions. In this article, we will understand the basic definition of the Brain Mapping Test and Narco Analysis Test along with their legal and ethical considerations.

What is the Brain Mapping Test?

Brain Mapping or P-300, often referred to as Quantitative Electroencephalography (QEEG), is a technique used to measure and analyze the electrical activity of the brain. This test generates data about brainwave patterns, by placing electrodes on the scalp, which are then analyzed to map the brain’s activity. It can be used for various purposes, including diagnosing neurological disorders, assessing brain function, and understanding cognitive processes. Brain Mapping Test is also used in research to explore brain activity related to specific mental states or disorders. While brain mapping provides valuable insights into brain function, it is not foolproof. The data collected can be influenced by numerous factors, including the individual's state of mind, making it challenging to draw definitive conclusions.

What is the Narco Analysis Test?

Commonly known as the Narco Test is a controversial technique used in forensic investigations in India. It involves administering a drug, typically sodium pentothal or sodium amytal, to a subject to induce a state of hypnagogia or reduced inhibitions, during which the individual is believed to be more likely to reveal truthful information. 

Legal Status

In a landmark decision, Selvi vs. State of Karnataka (May 05, 2010), the Supreme Court (SC) of India addressed the legality and constitutionality of narco analysis, along with other psychological tests like polygraphs. The Court ruled that narco analysis, as well as polygraph and brain mapping tests, could not be conducted without the subject’s informed consent. The Court emphasized that these tests could infringe on fundamental rights such as the right against self-incrimination and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, respectively. The judgment reads, “The compulsory administration of the impugned techniques violates the `right against self-incrimination'. This is because the underlying rationale of the said right is to ensure the reliability as well as voluntariness of statements that are admitted as evidence. This Court has recognized that the protective scope of Article 20(3) extends to the investigative stage in criminal cases and when read with Section 161(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 it protects accused persons, suspects as well as witnesses who are examined during an investigation. The test results cannot be admitted in evidence if they have been obtained through the use of compulsion.” 

It also said, “...forcing an individual to undergo any of the impugned techniques violates the standard of `substantive due process' which is required for restraining personal liberty. Such a violation will occur irrespective of whether these techniques are forcibly administered during the course of an investigation or for any other purpose since the test results could also expose a person to adverse consequences of a non-penal nature.” The bench also illustrated, “Even when the subject has given consent to undergo any of these tests, the test results by themselves cannot be admitted as evidence because the subject does not exercise conscious control over the responses during the administration of the test. However, any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntary administered test results can be admitted, in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.”

Legal and Ethical Considerations

• Both brain mapping and narco analysis test procedures involve significant ethical considerations. For brain mapping, while it is generally non-invasive, there are concerns about privacy and the potential misuse of the data obtained. Narco analysis, on the other hand, raises serious ethical questions regarding the coercion of subjects and the accuracy of information gathered under the influence of drugs. 
• The reliability of narco analysis results is questioned due to the subjective nature of the responses obtained under the influence of drugs. Similarly, while brain mapping provides valuable data on brain activity, its interpretative aspects can be influenced by numerous factors. Legal systems rely on corroborative evidence and expert testimony to validate the findings from these tests.
• Both brain mapping and narco analysis require informed consent. In the context of criminal investigations, ensuring that consent is obtained freely and voluntarily, without any coercion, is essential. The Supreme Court's rulings have reinforced the necessity of consent and the protection of individual rights.

Conclusion

Brain mapping and narco analysis tests represent complex intersections of science, law, and ethics. While brain mapping offers valuable insights into brain activity and potential neurological conditions, narco analysis remains a contentious tool in forensic investigations, fraught with legal and ethical challenges. In India, the use of these tests is closely regulated, with significant emphasis on obtaining informed consent and respecting individual rights. As technology and forensic science continue to evolve, the ongoing debates and legal considerations will shape the future application of these methods in the pursuit of justice.