Source: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Why in News?

Recently the Punjab & Haryana High Court acquittal of Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh and four others in the 2002 Ranjit Singh murder has stirred controversy. The court stated that the consent of the accused persons was taken before conducting the polygraph test.

What was the Background of Jasbir Singh (deceased) v. CBI Case?

• On July 10, 2002, Ranjit Singh was shot dead by four individuals while in the fields. His father, Joginder Singh, suspected Ram Kumar Sarpanch and Raj Singh due to prior disputes.
• FIR filed against Ram Kumar Sarpanch, Raj Singh, and four others under Sections 120-B, 302, 34 Indian Penal Code,1860 based on Joginder Singh's statement.
• Joginder Singh later implicated Dera Sacha Sauda followers, citing suspicions related to an anonymous letter about sexual exploitation.
• On 24.08.2002, Joginder Singh implicated Jasbir Singh and Sabdil Singh, a constable and gunman of Baba Gurmeet Singh, in the murder.
• The case transferred to CID Crime Branch on 22.11.2002. Jasbir Singh and Sabdil Singh were arrested on 02.12.2002.
• CID Crime Branch filed charge sheets against Jasbir Singh and Sabdil Singh on 17.02.2003 and a supplementary charge sheet.
• Joginder Singh petitioned for a CBI investigation due to dissatisfaction with local police inquiry.
• The High Court transferred the case to CBI on 10.11.2003 and began investigation.
• Polygraph Test was Conducted on three accused persons related to the alleged incident.
• High Court acquitted the Dera Chief and four other accused individuals, stating merit in their appeals and overturning the previous verdict.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Punjab and Haryana High Court acquitted Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh and four others who were sentenced to life imprisonment by a CBI court in the 2002 Ranjit Singh murder case.
• A division bench found the CBI, which took over the probe in November 2023, failed to establish the motive of the crime and rather, the prosecution case was "shrouded in doubts".
• The court observed that the instant case is a stark portrayal of the necessity of Courts of law making an incisive and objective analysis, of the evidence as exists on record, rather than the said objective analyses becoming attempted to become stultified, through a proactive media trial becoming made of the purported incriminatory role of the accused vis-a-vis the crime event.
• A polygraph test was conducted on three accused persons relating to an alleged incident. The Court noted that results of the examinations thereof reveal that there were some deceptive answers meted to the relevant queries.
• It further highlighted that it is nowhere stated that the consent of the accused persons was taken before conducting the polygraph test.

What is a Polygraph Test?

• Polygraph or Lie Detector Test is a procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions.
• This test is based on the assumption that physiological responses that are triggered when a person is lying are different from what they would be otherwise.
• A numerical value is assigned to each response to conclude whether the person is telling the truth, is deceiving, or is uncertain.
• A test similar to Polygraph was first done in the 19^th century by the Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso, who used a machine to measure changes in the blood pressure of criminal suspects during interrogation.

What is the Legal Admissibility of the Polygraph Test?

• The polygraphy test, along with other methods like narco-analysis and brain-mapping, is utilized by police to facilitate investigations while avoiding physical violence.
• These methods mainly rely on extracting information from the accused, potentially incriminating them.
• According to Article 21(3) of the Indian Constitution,1950 individuals cannot be compelled to testify against themselves, making polygraphy test results inadmissible as evidence in court.
• The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued guidelines to conduct polygraphy tests in accordance with Article 21, safeguarding personal liberty and privacy rights.
• Prior to these guidelines, tests were often coercive and violated individual liberties. Despite the guidelines, some agencies may not fully adhere to NHRC recommendations.
• The questions about the accuracy of polygraphy tests, as fear or panic during interrogation may lead to unreliable results.
• This poses the risk of wrongful punishment for innocent individuals who may falsely incriminate themselves under pressure.

What are the Guidelines Issued by NHRC Regarding the Polygraph Test?

• The guidelines issued by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on administering polygraph tests to suspects ensure a fair and transparent process that respects the rights of the accused.
  • Voluntary Consent: The accused must give their consent to undergo the polygraph test voluntarily. They should have the option to decline the test.
  • Informed Consent: Before consenting to the test, the accused should be fully informed about its purpose, procedure, and legal implications. This information should be provided by the police and the accused's lawyer.
  • Recorded Consent: The consent of the accused to undergo the polygraph test must be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate.
  • Documentation: During the court proceedings, the police must present evidence to show that the accused agreed to undergo the polygraph test. This documentation is presented by the lawyer in front of the judge.
  • Clarification of Statements: The accused should understand that the statements made during the polygraph test are considered as statements to the police, not confessions.
  • Judicial Consideration: When considering the results of a polygraph test, the judge considers factors such as the duration of the accused's detention and the interrogation.

What are the Landmark Judgments Related to Polygraph Test?

• Selvi v. State of Karnataka & Anr Case 2010:
  • The SC ruled on the legality and admissibility of narco tests establishing that the involuntary administration of narco or lie detector tests constitutes an intrusion into an individual's "mental privacy."
  • The apex court held that narco tests violate the fundamental right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which states that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
    • Self-incrimination is a legal principle under which a person cannot be compelled to provide information or testify against themselves in a criminal case.
• D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal case, 1997:
  • The SC ruled that involuntary administration of the polygraph and narcos test will amount to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment in the context of Article 21 or the Right to Life and Liberty.
• Other Observations of the SC:
  • Narco tests are not reliable or conclusive as evidence, as they are based on assumptions and probabilities.
  • Any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntarily administered test results can be admitted, under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.
    • Section 27 of IEA deals with how much information received from accused may be proved.
    • It states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police-officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.
  • The court also emphasized that the ‘Guidelines for the Administration of Polygraph Test on an Accused’, published by the National Human Rights Commission in 2000, must be strictly followed.