Sarla Bhat murder probe
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Apr 15: In the 1990 Sarla Bhat murder case, the court of Additional Sessions Judge, TADA/POTA Special Judge designated under the NIA Act, Srinagar, has rejected the plea of State Investigating Agency (SIA) seeking permission to subject suspects to narco analysis, brain mapping and deception detection tests, holding that such intrusive methods cannot be allowed at the instance of police to fill gaps in a decades-old investigation.
The application had been filed by the Chief Investigating Officer, Deputy Superintendent of Police, SIA Kashmir, through Hilal Ahmad Bhat, CPO for SIA Kashmir, in FIR No. 56/1990 of Police Station Nigeen, now being investigated by SIA Kashmir, relating to the killing of Sarla Bhat in April 1990.
The agency claimed that the suspects were not cooperating and that scientific techniques were necessary to extract truthful information, identify the actual culprits, establish motive and recover material evidence.
However, the suspects opposed the plea, arguing that the application had been filed after an unexplained delay of nearly 35 to 36 years and that they could not be subjected to invasive procedures merely to compensate for investigative lapses. They also submitted that many of them were now of advanced age and suffering from serious ailments, including cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes and neurological problems, making such tests risky and violative of their right to life, dignity and bodily integrity.
After hearing both sides, the court observed that the law laid down by the Supreme Court makes it clear that involuntary or police-driven narco analysis and allied scientific tests are impermissible and would violate the constitutional guarantees under Articles 20(3) and 21. The court held that such methods cannot be permitted as a routine investigative shortcut or to overcome alleged non-cooperation by suspects.
The court further noted that the plea had not come from any accused volunteering to undergo such tests at an appropriate legal stage, but from the investigating agency itself in an attempt to revive or strengthen an investigation that had remained inconclusive for more than three decades. It observed that at such a belated stage, any leads emerging from such tests would be extremely difficult to verify or corroborate.
Taking serious note of the extraordinary delay and the medical condition of several suspects, the court said investigative convenience cannot override fundamental rights. It held that there was no legal justification or compelling necessity to permit narco analysis, brain mapping or deception detection tests in the case and accordingly dismissed the SIA application.
At the same time, the court clarified that the investigating agency is at liberty to continue the probe in accordance with law by adopting all permissible, non-intrusive and constitutionally compliant methods recognised under criminal law.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
