In the face of several MPs demanding that their colleagues named in the scandal along with other characters be put through narco-analysis, the Lok Sabha Committee, headed by Kishore Chandra Deo, has submitted two notes on the subject along with its draft report. Their key conclusion: it’s by no means reliable evidence.

These form part of the voluminous annexures of the report, yet to be circulated to members of the committee. The note on admissibility of narco-analysis as legal evidence states that while inhibitions of people undergoing the test are “generally reduced, people under the influence of what is called the truth serum are still able to lie and even tend to fantasize.”

The conclusion: “While expert studies and court opinions available internationally have granted that there may be some use in narco-analysis, the overwhelming evidence is that narco-analysis is by no means a reliable science.”

The legal position, according to the Committee, is that such tests “don’t have legal validity as confessions made by semi-conscious persons are not admissible in court. The court, may, however, grant limited admissibility after considering the circumstances under which the test was obtained.”

The narco-analysis test conducted by the CBI on Krishna, a suspect in the Arushi Talwar murder case, finds specific mention with a word of caution that “the legality of such an intrusive test remains under question, particularly in the absence of any specific provision under existing law to regulate it.”

For the latest scientific appraisal of brain electro-physiology tests, the Lok Sabha Committee obtained a copy of the peer-review committee set up by the Home Ministry’s Directorate of Forensic Science. The 40-page report, is also now one of the annexures of the cash-for-vote report.

After visiting laboratories where brain-mapping tests were conducted in Bangalore and Gandhinagar, the high-level scientific committee, too, came to the conclusion that, as yet, the science was not developed enough for the electrophysiology-based technique to be used as admissible evidence in court.

The peer-review Committee, headed by D Nagaraja, Director of NIMHANS, Bangalore has stated that their review “suggests sub-optimal scientific basis for them (brain-mapping tests) to be used as evidence in court of law. Hence, they cannot be used in the court of law.”

Speaking to The Indian Express, Nagaraja said that the report had been submitted to the Home Ministry in May and that he had been approached by the Lok Sabha Secretariat to give them a copy of his findings.

The scientists have pointed out that several scientific parameters need to be put in place for brain-fingerprinting, especially since in India several languages and dialects are spoken. There needed to be a uniformity in laboratory procedures and standardization of probe presentations.

The Committee has noted: “Experimental works need to be subjected to transparent review by an expert committee to evaluate the validity and reliability of the findings. Only after this, this technique might have the potential to be used as one of the investigative tools.”