Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 338 (BOM)

Rajkumar Mohandas Savani v. State of Maharashtra

2008-02-29

BILAL NAZKI, S.A.BOBDE

body2008
JUDGMENT:- In the present case, the complainant, who has filed the complaint and the other eye witnesses cited by him, have been asked by the police to present themselves before the police for undergoing Narco Analysis Test. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the witnesses cannot be subjected to the test. Whatever the witnesses had to tell the police they have said it and it is for the police to investigate the matter and come to their own conclusion. 2. Learned Addl. P.P. relied on a judgment of this court in the case of Ramchandra Ram Reddy & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2004 ALL MR (Cri) 1704), to contend that the police are given rights under the investigative powers to put anybody under the Narco Analysis Test, whether he is an accused or a witness. The case referred deals with the accused persons only but the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court would apply equally to the witnesses. She has also relied on an unreported order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 20th February, 2008 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.116 of2oo8, in which the Division Bench of this Court noted. "If the police find it proper to hold medical tests viz., polygraphic test, brain mapping and narco-analysis test of the witnesses in order to trace out the abducted person, the police, under their investigative powers, are entitled to do so". This order does not give any reason for coming to such conclusion. However, we presume that this order was passed in the light of the earlier judgment to which a reference has been given above, From the said judgment. we do not find that the court at all considered the impact of Article 19 of the Constitution over the issue. The discussion before the Court was only confined to Article 20 of the Constitution of India. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that right to speech includes the right to silence as well. Therefore, if a person is forced to speak with the aid of medicine put to his body forcibly, his right to silence guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India will be violated. 3. In view of the fact that there is already a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the view that the matter should be heard by the Full Bench. 3. In view of the fact that there is already a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the view that the matter should be heard by the Full Bench. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment as regards the interpretation of Article 20 of the Constitution of India also needs a fresh consideration. 4. In this view of the matter, we consider it appropriate that the whole matter be placed before the Full Bench after obtaining orders from the learned Chief Justice, Registry to do the needful. 5. In the meantime, it is directed that the police shall not force the witnesses to undergo the Narco Analysis Test. Ordered accordingly.