AP High Court split on lie detector test on' Satyam' Raju

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, April 23 : A division bench comprising Justice A Gopal Reddy and Justice Samudrala Govindarajulu of the AP High Court on Friday differed on brain mapping and
polygraph tests on B Ramalinga Raju,prime accused in Multi crore Satyam fraud and his associates.

The judges delivered their verdicts on petition filed by Ramalinga Raju and his brother Rama Raju and Srinivas Vadlamani, former CFO of the company challenging the orders of a lower court by permitting the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct polygraph and Brain Mapping tests on them.

Justice Govindarajulu favoured the tests , whereas Justice Gopala Reddy negative the
lower court order observing that the test are unconstitutional and the tests involve
invasion into a person's body without his consent which is not permitted under law.

As both the orders were contradictory to each other, the matter would now go back to
Chief Justice who will have to refer it to a third judge for a fresh hearing on the
matter.

Justice Gopal Reddy ruled that there is no law governing such tests which are violative of the right to life. He said the amended provisions of Section 53 of the Criminal Procedure Code speak of `such other tests' in their explanations and it is not clearly stated whether these other tests include the polygraph, narco analysis and brain mapping tests. He said these amounts to using third degree methods.

Justice Reddy observed "using the ejusdem generis rule, the rule the judges can use for interpreting a law whose linguistic construction is somewhat ambiguous."

He pointed out that these tests do not form part of the `such other tests' contemplated in the Section 53 and its sub sections. The courts cannot supplant or widen such other tests by including these three tests.

He said "these tests involve invasion into a person's body without his consent which is not permitted under law. It violates the Article 21 of the Constitution and in such compelling circumstances individuals can invoke the protections available to them under Article 20(3) of the Constitution".

Justice Gopala Reddy observed that the accused cannot be compelled to undergo such tests in the absence of any law governing such tests and set aside the lower court order.

However, Justice Govindarajulu ruled that these tests can be conducted on the accused to protect the interests of several victims who lost heavily due to the actions of the accused in this scam.

He said that any hindrance to these tests would affect not only the CBI's right to
investigate but also the interests of various victims within and outside the country who are affected by the activities of the accused. He allowed the CBI to conduct these tests on the accused.