The right against self-incrimination entitles a person to refuse giving of

Correct option is D

The correct answer is (d) narco analysis test.

Explanation

The Right against Self-Incrimination is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, which states: "No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."

The Supreme Court has drawn a clear distinction between "physical evidence" and "testimonial evidence" to determine what a person can be compelled to provide.

• Why (d) is the correct answer: In the landmark case of Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), the Supreme Court ruled that involuntary subjection to narco analysis, polygraph tests (lie detector), and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) violates Article 20(3). The court held that these tests extract information from the subject's mind, amounting to "testimonial compulsion." Because the person is not in a conscious state to control their answers, forcing such a test is an unconstitutional intrusion into their mental privacy and right against self-incrimination. This was recently reaffirmed in Amlesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2025).
• Why (a), (b), and (c) are incorrect: In the case of State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad (1961), an eleven-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that "to be a witness" means imparting personal knowledge (testimony). It does not include the mere production of mechanical or physical evidence.
• Handwriting samples, blood samples, and thumb impressions are considered "physical/material evidence."
• They are used for identification and comparison and do not require the accused to "talk" or "share knowledge."
• Therefore, an accused can be compelled to provide these under laws like the Identification of Prisoners Act (now Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022) without violating Article 20(3).