Why Aftab would undergo Narco test? How and why Narco test is done?

A Saket court has approved the appeal of Delhi Police to carry out narco-analysis test on Aaftab Poonawala. 28-year-old Aftab is accused of murdering his live-in partner Shraddha Walkar.

Why Aftab would undergo Narco test? How and why Narco test is done?
Aaftab Poonawala

A Saket court has approved the appeal of Delhi Police to carry out narco-analysis test on Aaftab Poonawala. 28-year-old Aftab is accused of murdering his live-in partner Shraddha Walkar, 26 and slicing up her body into 35 pieces and disposing the parts in a forest. The accused agreed to undergo the test.

What is a narco test?

In a narco/narcoanalysis test, a drug named sodium pentothal or sodium thiopental (a fast-acting, short-duration anaesthetic, used in larger doses to sedate patients during surgery) is injected to the accused. This takes the accused to a sedated state in which a person’s capability lie becomes weak and a person speaks only truth. Thus the drug is also called as ‘truth serum’.

Narco-analysis falls under the category of deception detection test (DDT) that includes polygraph and brain mapping. However a polygraph test is free from involvement of drugs. The instruments are attached like cardio-cuffs or sensitive electrodes to the suspect, and measuring their variables such as blood pressure, pulse rate, respiration, sweat gland activity, blood flow, etc., while answering the questions posed to them. 

Yet, all DDTs do not guarantee 100 per cent accuracy scientifically. So they cannot be considered as fool proof confessions by the Supreme Court, because the suspect who was drugged lacks choice over the answers they give. But these answers can act as a base for the police and help in unrevealing new information that can be submitted as evidence. 

Can the accused refuse to take these tests?

The Court considered international norms on human rights, the right to a fair trial, and the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution and clarified that no lie detector tests should be administered “except on the basis of the consent of the accused” that should be recorded before a judicial magistrate. The accused must have a lawyer, who along with the police must inform them of the physical, emotional, and legal implications of the test.