Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for TOFAN SINGH VS STATE OF TAMIL NADU...
2021 2 Supreme 1 : In the Supreme Court’s judgment in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), the Court held that the results of a polygraph test are personal testimony and therefore fall within the protection of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. Compulsory administration of a polygraph test violates the right against self‑incrimination and cannot be admitted as evidence. Even when administered voluntarily, the test results themselves are not admissible, though any information or material discovered as a result of the test may be admitted under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.Checking relevance for Amlesh Kumar VS State of Bihar...
2025 5 Supreme 449 : The Supreme Court’s recent rulings (e.g., Selvi v. State (2015) and subsequent judgments up to 2025) confirm that any involuntary polygraph (lie‑detector) test violates Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Indian Constitution and its results cannot be admitted as evidence. A polygraph test may be administered only voluntarily, with the accused’s informed consent, presence of a lawyer, recording before a Judicial Magistrate, and other safeguards prescribed by the NHRC Guidelines (2000). Even when voluntarily taken, the test’s results are not admissible directly; only information discovered thereafter may be used under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.Checking relevance for Rajesh Talwar VS C. B. I. ...
Checking relevance for STATE OF U. P. VS SUNIL...
2017 4 Supreme 164 : In Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) the Supreme Court of India held that polygraph examination is a testimonial act. Compulsory administration of a polygraph test amounts to ‘testimonial compulsion’ and therefore triggers the protection of Article 20(3) of the Constitution, limiting its admissibility as evidence.Checking relevance for Captain Manjit Singh Virdi (Retd. ) VS Hussain Mohammed Shattaf...
2023 4 Supreme 198 : In the Bombay High Court (Revision Application No. 135 of 2012, order dated 17 July 2013), the court examined the use of polygraph testing as part of a psychological evaluation. The judgment held that while polygraph results (and related BEOS profiling) are admissible as material evidence, they are not sufficient on their own to secure a conviction. The court emphasized that at the charge‑hearing stage the entire prosecution evidence must be considered, and that reliance solely on polygraph findings (as the lower court had done) constitutes an abuse of process. This decision reflects a recent legal development in India that polygraph tests can be admitted but their weight is limited and must be evaluated alongside other evidence.Checking relevance for Mehmood Nayyar Azam VS State of Chattisgarh...
2012 5 Supreme 370 : In Smt. Selvi & others v. State of Karnataka (AIR 2010 SC 1974), the Supreme Court ruled that the compulsory administration of polygraph examinations (along with narcoanalysis and brain electrical activation profile tests) amounts to ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment’ and violates Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, thereby prohibiting forced polygraph tests in criminal investigations.
