NOTE! This site uses cookies and similar technologies.

By using this website or our services you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more

I understand

A cookie is a small piece of data that a website asks your browser to store on your computer or mobile device. The cookie allows the website to "remember" your actions or preferences over time. Most browsers support cookies, but users can set their browsers to decline them and can delete them whenever they like.

Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services, Directive 2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws (Text with EEA relevance) 

OJ L 337, 18.12.2009, p. 11–36 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 13 Volume 052 P. 224 - 249

NSS In Courts

NSS has been used for a decade in Indian courts as a Support to Investigation.

NSS Reports are not used as Primary Evidence.

Unlike other technologies which have been used in 2 or 3 cases, NSS has been used in over 700 cases reported by independent Forensic laboratories in areas such as Murders, Insurgency, Poaching, Illegal immigration to name a few.

NSS is routinely used in highly sensitive cases to home in on perpetrators of a crime and differentiate involvement.


In a significant development in 2010 the Supreme Court of India ruled that tests such as Narco, Lie Detection and Brain Electrical Activation Profile can be conducted with Informed consent, and any information or material discovered with the help of BEOS can be admitted as Evidence in court.

Unfortunately the court confused BEAP/BEOS with the outdated and minimalistic P300 technique with which BEOS has no connection.


Excerpt from the Supreme Court judgement-

“However, we do leave room for the voluntary administration of the impugned techniques in the context of criminal justice, provided that certain safeguards are in place. Even when the subject has given consent to undergo any of these tests, the test results by themselves cannot be admitted as evidence because the subject does not exercise conscious control over the responses during the administration of the test. However, any information or material that is subsequently discovered with the help of voluntary administered test results can be admitted, in accordance with Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.

The National Human Rights Commission had published ‘Guidelines for the Administration of Polygraph Test (Lie Detector Test) on an Accused’ in 2000. These guidelines should be strictly adhered to and similar safeguards should be adopted for conducting the ‘Narcoanalysis technique’ and the ‘Brain Electrical Activation Profile’ test.

The text of these guidelines has been reproduced below:

(i) No Lie Detector Tests should be administered except on the basis of consent of the accused. An option should be given to the accused whether he wishes to avail such test.

(ii) If the accused volunteers for a Lie Detector Test, he should be given access to a lawyer and the physical, emotional and legal implication of such a test should be explained to him by the police and his lawyer.

(iii) The consent should be recorded before a Judicial Magistrate.

(iv) During the hearing before the Magistrate, the person alleged to have agreed should be duly

represented by a lawyer.

(v) At the hearing, the person in question 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.

(vi) The Magistrate shall consider all factors relating to the detention including the length of detention and the nature of the interrogation.

(vii) The actual recording of the Lie Detector Test shall be done by an independent agency (such as a

hospital) and conducted in the presence of a lawyer.

(viii) A full medical and factual narration of the manner of the information received must be taken on record.”

About Brain Signature Profiling [ BEOS ]

“B.E.O.S.” refers to a signature extracted from the electrical oscillations of the brain of a person, obtained while presenting probes related to specific events in which the person is suspected to have participated. The signature represents the presence of electrical activation pattern indicating retrieval of Experiential Knowledge of the said participation. The signature is absent while the subject retrieves information, which one could have conceptually (from sources other than participation) acquired.

B.E.O.S is also called Brain-Mapping in some parts of the world which is a misnomer.

Neural processing / activation are different during retrieval of knowledge acquired through experience in comparison with retrieval of knowledge acquired through conceptual learning. Retrieval of Experiencing Knowledge may have components of sensory-motor mental imageries representing reality contacts and verifications, though the knowledge derived is only subjectively verified and interpreted.

Extensive research in Neuroscience has shown that the brain activation pattern is significantly different during ‘remembering’ and ‘knowing’. Remembrance is always that of past personal episodes which constitutes the experiences of the individual. On the other hand knowing represents retrieval from the knowledge bank of the brain used for recognition of the entities of world and their conceptualizations.

Forensic Tech2a

The technique has immense forensic and medical application as it can extract ‘signature’ related to specific experiences with personal significance, one has gone through in the past and hence one is bound to remember. These experiences may be related to personal participation in activities, which may include planning, discussions, and even strong intentions which served as motives for execution of specific actions. Generally one remembers only those experiences which have personal significance to the self. Emotions, gains, and such personal values attached to the participation render an event personally significant and retrievable.

An important feature of the test is that the subject is not presented with questions and need not answer or provide any response while listening to the probes.

“Neuro Signature System” represents the equipment designed and developed by Axxonet. It records scalp electrical activity from a person using multiple electrodes and the N.S.S. program extracts the signature, if present, when the subject silently listens to the probes. The probes are presented in auditory mode.

The Neuro Signature System carries out extensive analyses of the electrical oscillations for computing both frequency and time domain related changes induced and provoked by the probes. At the end of the automated analyses, the system prints out an interpreted report which tells the nature of involvement, if any, of the subject in the said activities probed by the test. Based on the probes presented, it can indicate if the subject took part in an activity, the specific role played by one, whether related to planning or execution. It can also help identify a person from a group who has performed a specific activity or determine the differential roles of the individuals tested.

Continuous research is in progress at Axxonet for better understanding and refining analysis methods for the detection of the various changes recorded during the presentation of the probes, their display, and their neurocognitive significances.

N.S.S. BEOS carries out the entire range of analyses and the interpretation of the analysed results automatically and prepares the Forensic Report of the suspect.

The test can be used as a powerful investigatory aid. The investigating agency has the duty to be confidential about the outcome revelations of the test, unless the same is otherwise revealed by material evidence and are presented in a court of law.