Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question refers to the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in Selvi & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2010) 7 SCC 263, which examined the constitutionality of new-age investigative techniques like brain-mapping (BEAP test), polygraph (lie-detector) tests, and narco-analysis. The Court had to decide if compelling an accused to undergo these tests violated their fundamental rights.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The Supreme Court, in its detailed judgment, held that the compulsory administration of these tests is unconstitutional as it violates two key fundamental rights:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Article 20(3) - Right against self-incrimination: This article protects an accused person from being compelled to be a witness against himself. The Court held that forcing an individual to undergo these tests, where their responses are not in their conscious control, amounts to testimonial compulsion and thus violates Article 20(3).
\item Article 21 - Right to life and personal liberty: The Court held that forcing a person to undergo these tests is an unwarranted intrusion into their mental privacy and personal liberty. It violates the right to a fair trial and the right to privacy, which are integral parts of Article 21.
\end{enumerate}
The other articles mentioned are irrelevant:
\begin{itemize}
\item Arts. 23 & 24 deal with the right against exploitation.
\item Arts. 15 & 16 deal with the right to equality.
\item Arts. 29 & 30 deal with cultural and educational rights of minorities.
\end{itemize}
Step 3: Final Answer:
The tests were held to be in violation of Articles 20 and 21.