Article 20 of the Indian Constitution: Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offences
Introduction
Article 20 of the Indian Constitution provides protection to individuals against arbitrary and unfair criminal prosecution. It ensures that no person is convicted under retrospective laws, punished more than once for the same offense, or forced to give self-incriminating evidence.
This article guarantees fundamental rights even for those accused of crimes, ensuring justice and fairness in legal proceedings.
.png "Article 20")
Text of Article 20
Article 20(1) - Protection from Ex Post Facto Laws
No person shall be convicted of any offense except for a violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act, nor shall they be subjected to a penalty greater than what was prescribed at the time of the offense.
Article 20(2) - Protection Against Double Jeopardy
No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offense more than once.
Article 20(3) - Protection Against Self-Incrimination
No person accused of an offense shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Explanation of Article 20
Article 20 ensures that individuals are not treated unfairly in criminal cases. It provides three major protections:
1. Ex Post Facto Law (Article 20(1))
- A person cannot be punished for an act that was not an offense when committed.
- Penalty cannot be increased retrospectively for an already committed crime.
- Example: If a law in 2024 increases the punishment for theft, it cannot be applied to crimes committed in 2023.
2. Protection Against Double Jeopardy (Article 20(2))
- No one can be punished twice for the same offense.
- This ensures fairness in the judicial system and prevents harassment of individuals through repeated trials.
- Example: If a person has been tried and punished for theft, they cannot be prosecuted again for the same act.
- Note: This applies only to criminal cases, not civil matters or departmental inquiries.
3. Protection Against Self-Incrimination (Article 20(3))
- No person can be forced to testify against themselves.
- Confessions must be voluntary.
- Example: The police cannot force an accused person to confess to a crime under torture or threats.
- Exception: This protection does not apply to providing fingerprints, blood samples, or handwriting specimens.
Key Supreme Court Cases on Article 20
| Case Name | Judgment |
|---|---|
| Kedar Nath v. State of West Bengal (1953) | Ex post facto laws cannot impose retrospective punishment. |
| Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay (1953) | Double jeopardy applies only if the person has been prosecuted and punished in a criminal court. |
| Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) | Narco-analysis, polygraph tests, and brain mapping cannot be forced, as they violate self-incrimination rights. |
| Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (1978) | Police cannot force an accused to answer questions that might be self-incriminating. |
Significance of Article 20
✅ Ensures Fairness – Protects individuals from arbitrary state action.
✅ Prevents Harassment – Stops repeated prosecution for the same crime.
✅ Maintains Justice – Ensures laws are not applied unfairly in the past.
✅ Protects Individual Dignity – Prevents forced confessions in criminal investigations.
Challenges and Controversies
❌ Delayed Trials – Even with protection, cases drag on for years, denying true justice.
❌ Use of Torture – Despite the law, custodial torture still exists, violating self-incrimination rights.
❌ Misuse of Preventive Detention Laws – Some laws allow detention without trial, raising human rights concerns.
Conclusion
Article 20 is a powerful safeguard for individuals accused of crimes, ensuring that laws are applied fairly and justice prevails. It upholds fundamental rights by preventing unfair trials, protecting against forced confessions, and ensuring that no one is punished twice for the same crime. However, strict enforcement is needed to prevent misuse by authorities.
.png)
COMMENTS