Article 20 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Here is a detailed explanation of Article 20 of the Constitution of India, along with relevant case laws.
🇮🇳 Article 20 – Protection in respect of conviction for offences
📜 Full Text:
Article 20. Protection in respect of conviction for offences:
(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
🧠 Explanation of Clauses:
🔹 Clause (1): Ex Post Facto Law Prohibited
A person cannot be punished for an act which was not an offence when committed.
Also, no enhanced punishment can be applied retroactively.
Example: If an act becomes a crime in 2025, someone who did that act in 2024 cannot be punished.
🔹 Clause (2): Double Jeopardy
A person cannot be tried and punished twice for the same offence.
🔹 Clause (3): Right Against Self-Incrimination
An accused cannot be forced to give testimony that can be used against them in a criminal case.
⚖️ Important Case Laws:
1. Kedar Nath Bajoria v. State of West Bengal (AIR 1953 SC 404)
The Supreme Court held that Clause (1) of Article 20 prohibits punishment under a law that was not in force at the time of the act.
Emphasized protection against retrospective criminal legislation.
2. Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay (AIR 1953 SC 325)
Facts: A person caught with undeclared gold at the airport was penalized under the Customs Act. Later, he was prosecuted under another law for the same act.
Held: Since the earlier proceeding was not before a court, the second trial was not barred by double jeopardy.
Principle: Double Jeopardy applies only to judicial proceedings, not administrative or departmental actions.
3. Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (AIR 1978 SC 1025)
The accused (a former Chief Minister) refused to answer questions in an investigation.
Held: Right to silence is part of Article 20(3).
No person can be compelled to make self-incriminating statements even during investigation.
Also extended to anticipatory self-incrimination.
4. Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263
Concerned use of narco-analysis, polygraph, and brain mapping.
Held: Such techniques are unconstitutional if done without consent, as they violate Article 20(3).
Reinforced mental privacy and right against self-incrimination.
✅ Key Highlights:
| Clause | Provision | Protection Type |
|---|---|---|
| 20(1) | No retrospective punishment | Legal Protection |
| 20(2) | No double punishment | Procedural Protection |
| 20(3) | No forced self-incrimination | Personal Protection |
📝 Summary:
Article 20 is a fundamental right applicable to criminal law only.
It ensures fairness and protection to individuals facing prosecution.
These protections cannot be suspended even during Emergency (Article 359 exception).
RELATED Blog
0 comments