On 19 May 2026, a two-judge bench held that a directed crime-scene re-enactment limited to physical movements does not per se amount to testimonial compulsion under Article 20(3); such material is admissible as corroborative — not substantive — evidence. Conviction restored on circumstantial proof; death sentence commuted to life.
On 5 May 2010, a three-judge Bench held that the involuntary administration of narco-analysis, polygraph and Brain Electrical Activation Profile tests violates the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) and the right to personal liberty under Article 21. The judgment extended the Article 20(3) protection from spoken or written testimony to involuntary extraction of personal knowledge from the mind. A digest of the doctrinal architecture, the consent framework, and how it now travels onto BSA s. 51.