Page 43 - Forensic News Journal Jan Feb 2018

Constitutional Validity of the Polygraph Test

Another act which comes guideline for the induction versy has been settled by

for the constitutional va- of new types of scientific the Supreme Court in a
lidity of lie detector test is evidence (Lie Detector landmark judgment of Ajit
The Indian Evidence Act- Test, Brain Printing, Etc.) Sachit Muggvi V State

(sec.45). This is the most The question arises here Of Kerala, AIR 1997 SC
important section of the that who are experts then. 3255. They have decided

Act vis-à-vis polygraphs. Section 45 indicates that that the assistance of a
It states” when a court has who are experts or we can handwriting expert should
to form an opinion upon say in another words as be obtained as a matter of

a point of foreign law or Specially Skilled persons! prudence. At what stage
of science or art, or as to Special skill has not been can the court order a per-

the identity of handwriting defined but by conven- son to give specimens: at
or finger impressions, the tion is it acquired through the investigation or at the
opinion upon that point, of Basic education, Training, trial stage? This aspect

persons specially skilled Experience, Research, and is still in the melting pot
in such foreign law, sci- Participation in scientific though Supreme Court has

ence or art or in questions gatherings. The second ruled that the court cannot
as to the identity of hand- most important section order taking of specimen
writing or finger impres- relating to expert evidence if the case is not pending

sions are relevant facts. is section 73 of Indian trial before it like in the
Such persons are called Evidence Act. case of Ram Babu Misra

experts. V State, AIR 1980 SC
This section specifies 791. Section 46 is about
There has been a lot of what comparison material Facts bearing upon opin-

confusion about what for disputed handwrit- ions of experts. Section 51
constitutes science. Con- ing signatures or seals (or is about grounds of opin-

tradictory judgments have for finger prints) can be ion when relevant. Section
cluttered the earlier case utilized by courts. This 159 is about Refreshing
law. But by and large the section has given head- Memory. Evidence Act

recent supreme court judg- ache all round. The main plays an important role in
ment State v Chaudhary controversial points are: the constitutional validity

AIR 1996 SC 1491 has Should the comparison of polygraphs. Especially
not only eliminated the material be examined section 45 and section 46
absurdity relating to type- only by the judge with or is a key. We can see that

script identification but without the assistance of here lot of emphasis has
is has also provided the the experts. This contro- been given on experts and

43