Sexual offences and forensic psychiatry: Selvi v State of Karnataka: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Sexual offences and forensic psychiatry: Selvi v State of Karnataka

Sample item

Police want to administer narco-analysis to a suspect who refuses. What is the position after the Supreme Court judgment in Selvi v State of Karnataka (2010)?

AIt may be done on a magistrate's orderBThe result is admissible as a confessionCIt may be done in terrorism casesDInvoluntary narco-analysis, polygraph or brain mapping is unconstitutional

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

D. Involuntary narco-analysis, polygraph or brain mapping is unconstitutional

The Court held that compulsory administration of narco-analysis, polygraph or brain electrical activation profile violates the right against self-incrimination and personal liberty. It may be done only with voluntary consent and safeguards, and the result is not a confession.

Option by option

A. It may be done on a magistrate's order
A magistrate's order cannot override the constitutional protection.
B. The result is admissible as a confession
Results are not confessions and are not admissible as such.
C. It may be done in terrorism cases
The judgment made no exception for terrorism cases.
D. Involuntary narco-analysis, polygraph or brain mapping is unconstitutional (correct)
Correct. Forcing the tests violates the protection against self-incrimination and personal liberty.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is D, Involuntary narco-analysis, polygraph or brain mapping is unconstitutional. The Court held that compulsory administration of narco-analysis, polygraph or brain electrical activation profile violates the right against self-incrimination and personal liberty.

Why is "It may be done on a magistrate's order" not the answer?

A magistrate's order cannot override the constitutional protection.

Why is "The result is admissible as a confession" not the answer?

Results are not confessions and are not admissible as such.

Why is "It may be done in terrorism cases" not the answer?

The judgment made no exception for terrorism cases.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Sexual offences and forensic psychiatry: Selvi v State of Karnataka in Forensic Medicine. It may be done only with voluntary consent and safeguards, and the result is not a confession.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as an application question: it asks you to use a fact on a patient or a finding. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Sexual offences and forensic psychiatry: Selvi v State of Karnataka?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.