Annual Report 1999-2000 to prescribe guidelines regarding arrest, even while at the same time not unduly curtailing the power of the police to effectively maintain and enforce law and order and proper investigation. The Commission's guidelines regarding arrest were sent to the Chief Secretaries of all the States and Union Territories on 22 November 1999, with a request to translate these guidelines into their respective regional languages and making them available to all police officers and in all police stations for compliance. Alleged illegal detention and custodial torture of Shri Inder P. Choudhrie in Himachal Pradesh: Administration of the lie detector test (Case No. 117/8/97-98) The Commission had received a petition dated 12 May 1997, from Shri Inder P. Choudhrie, a resident of New Delhi. He alleged that he was arrested by the police in connection with a murder, and thereafter subjected to various kinds of custodial torture for a period of 13 days in police custody in Shimla, where he had gone to attend the hearing of a civil suit. He added that he was illegally detained, tortured and subjected to a 'Lie Detector Test' without his consent, after being given an intravenous drug. He sought an enquiry into the case by the CBI. As the complainant had also approached the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and later the Supreme Court without any success, the Commission declined to intervene in the matter. Subsequent review petitions filed by the petitioner before the Commission were also dismissed. However, while dismissing the last review petition vide its order dated 20 October 1999, the Commission had taken up the issue of the administration of the Lie Detector Test. As the "Law" did not regulate the Lie Detector Test, which was administered to an accused hence, the Commission was of the view that some guidelines should be formulated for the purpose. After a careful consideration of the matter, the Commission laid down the following guidelines relating to the administration of the Lie Detector Test: □ No Lie Detector Test should be administered without the consent of the accused. Option should be given to the accused as to whether he wishes to avail the test. □ If the accused volunteers for the tests, he should be given access to a lawyer. The police and the lawyer should explain to him the physical, emotional and legal implication of such a test. □ The consent should be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate. □ During the hearing before the Magistrate, the accused should be duly represented by a lawyer. □ At the hearing, the person should also be told in clear terms that the statement that is made shall not be a 'confessional' statement to the Magistrate, but will have the status of a statement made to the police. 116