Scribd
Upload
0 views

DOC-20250413-WA0007.

Article 20 of the Constitution provides fundamental rights to all individuals, prohibiting ex-post facto laws, double jeopardy, and self-incrimination. It ensures that no one can be convicted for acts that were not criminal at the time of commission and protects against being punished more than once for the same offence. Additionally, it addresses the legality of narco-analysis tests, emphasizing the need for consent and the protection of rights against self-incrimination.

Uploaded by

Sanghpriy Jaiswal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 views

DOC-20250413-WA0007.

Article 20 of the Constitution provides fundamental rights to all individuals, prohibiting ex-post facto laws, double jeopardy, and self-incrimination. It ensures that no one can be convicted for acts that were not criminal at the time of commission and protects against being punished more than once for the same offence. Additionally, it addresses the legality of narco-analysis tests, emphasizing the need for consent and the protection of rights against self-incrimination.

Uploaded by

Sanghpriy Jaiswal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Polity Handout by Mr.

Iqbal Singh Sandhu


Article 20 - Protection in respect of conviction for offences
This fundamental right is available to all persons, both citizens and non-citizens. Article 20
prohibits the state from performing following actions:
• Enacting ex – post facto criminal legislation. Criminal laws cannot be retrospective but
civil legislation can be retrospective or prospective.

• Practicing double jeopardy

• Compelling an accused person to provide self – incriminating evidence.

Under article 20, the Constitution has taken care to safeguard the rights of persons accused of
crimes. This article has been considered so important that the Forty-fourth amendment provides
that it cannot be suspended even during an Emergency by an order under article 359.
Article 20 (1): states that no person can be convicted for the performance of an act or
commission of an act which at the time of performance of act was not a criminal offence
according to the law. A person can be punished in a court of law only for the commission of an
act, which according to the law was a criminal offence at the time of its commission. An act
which was not originally an offence according to the law cannot be subsequently made into a
criminal offence and the person punished for such an act. Furthermore, article 20 (1) states that
no person can be given a punishment greater than what is prescribed in the law at the time of its
commission.
However, civil legislations can have retrospective effect, for example Tax Laws, applied
retrospectively are not considered unconstitutional. If the criminal legislation is given
retrospective effect then it can victimize any individual any time.
Article 20 (2): the term double jeopardy means punishing an individual more than once for the
commission of a singular offence. Article 20 (2) states no person shall be prosecuted and
punished more than once for the commission of a singular offence. Article 20 (2) prohibits
criminal courts from exercising double jeopardy and not the civil courts.
It does not immunize a person from proceedings which are not before a court of law. Thus, a
Government servant prosecuted and convicted by a court of law can nonetheless be punished
under departmental proceedings for the same offence.
Article 20 (3): states that no person who is accused of an offence shall be compelled to give
evidence against himself. Self-incrimination means any statement made by the accused to the
police is not admissible as evidence in the court of law. Even confessional statement made by the

VAJIRAM & RAVI 1


accused to the police does not have value of evidence in court of law. Aim of article 20 (3) is to
prevent an innocent person from being convicted of an offence on the basis of confessional
statement extracted by the police by using torture and third degree methods.
Any confessions made by the accused voluntarily to the judicial magistrate are admissible as
evidence in the court of law and accused person can be punished solely on the basis of this
confessional statement.
Article 20 (3) does not prohibit the obtaining of thumb impression, specimen signatures from an
accused or the conduct of medical examination of the accused.
Narco analysis test:
There are three types of test:
• Polygraph test or lie detector test
• Brain mapping
• Narcodrug test

Honourable Supreme Court in Selvi vs. State of Karnataka (2010), held that narcoanalysis test
if conducted on an individual without his consent is unconstitutional and void as it violates the
right to privacy under article 21, right against self-incrimination under article 20 (3). Those who
volunteer for this test must have access to a lawyer and have the physical, emotional and legal
implications of the test explained to them by the police and the lawyer.
The results of this test cannot be considered as confessions. However, any information or
material subsequently discovered with the help of such a voluntarily taken test can be admitted
as evidence in the court of law.

VAJIRAM & RAVI 2

You might also like