The accused has the right to a fair trial and the admissibility of scientific evidence to prove innocence.

G.B. Shah, J.

1. Heard Mr. S.K. Bagga, learned advocate for the applicants and Mr. K.L. Pandya, learned APP for the respondent-State.

2. The present Criminal Revision Application is filed challenging the order dated 2/4/2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 376 of 2014 below application Exh. 6 rejecting the said application preferred by the applicants herein under section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C." for short) for further investigation in respect of the offence alleged against the present applicants. After proceeding with the submissions, learned advocate for the applicants, producing an affidavit affirmed by himself, has submitted that as such, all the applicants-original accused are in judicial custody and therefore, he, upon instructions received from one Mr. Rakesh Mulchand Dayani, who is nephew of present applicant No. 1-original accused No. 1, has filed this affidavit and now he is restricting his submissions so far as point/ground No. 7 of the application at Exh. 6 is concerned and right now, he does not press the present Criminal Revision Application for other grounds of further investigation which has been sought by the applicants in the application at Exh. 6 and sought liberty to file an application in accordance with law as and when need arises during the stage of defense of the accused for rest of the points/grounds. In light of the affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants, learned advocate for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court towards the observation made on page 5 of the impugned order more particularly line Nos. 4, 5 and 6 which reads as under:

"Therefore, the lie detection test or narco analysis test are considered to be in aid of investigation and cannot be accepted as an evidence of a particular fact."

He has further submitted that except the above observations made by the trial court, so far as point/ground No. 7 of application Exh. 6 is concerned, no specific finding has been given for not allowing the narco analysis test/lie detector test as narrated in point No. 7 of application Exh. 6. He has placed reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Purshottam Swaroopchand Soni v. State of Gujarat reported in 2007(3) GLR page 2088 wherein it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph Nos. 7, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4 as under:

"7. At this stage, it is required to be noted that in the present case, the petitioner is the accused. It is also important to note that the accused is demanding Brain mapping test/Brain fingerprinting to prove his innocence. Brain fingerprinting is based on the principle that the brain is central to all human acts. In a criminal act, there may not be many physical evidences at the crime scene, but the brain is always there recording the sequences of the crime. The basic difference between a criminal and innocent person is that the criminal has the details of the crime stored in his brain, whereas the innocent does not. In Brain fingerprinting testing, the subject is made to sit in a quiet room with sensors on his headband that measure electrical brain responses. Three types of stimuli: targets, irrelevant, and probes, in the form of words, pictures, or sounds are presented for a fraction of a second each, under computer control. Incoming stimulus that is significant and noteworthy results in a specific, electrical brain response, known as P-300, which is one aspect of a larger brain wave response known as M.E.R.M.E.R. (Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response). However, determination of innocence or guilt is a legal entity rather than a scientific determination. The investigating agencies can take the results of Brain fingerprinting as an evidence along with all other available evidence to reach a verdict of guilty or not guilty. According to a study the accuracy rate of this