Skip to main content

article 20 of the indian constitution

                                      ARTICLE 20 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION 

 



INTRODUCTION 


ARTICLE 20 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION STATES THE NO PERSON SHALL BE CONVICTED OF ANY OFFENVCE EXCEPT FOR THE VIOLATION OF A LAW IN FORCE AT THE TIME OF THE COMMISSION OF THE ACT CHARGED AS AN OFFENCE , NOR THAT HE BE SUBJECTED TO PENALTY GREATER THAN WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN INFLICTED UNDER THE LAW . 

NO PERSON SHALL BE EXECUTED AND PUNISHED FOR THE  SAME OFFENCE MORE THAN ONCE . – NEMO DEBET BIS VEXARI . 

NO PERSON ACCUSED OF ANY OFFENCE SHALL BE COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF . 


ARTICLE 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION CALLS FOR THE PROTECTION OF PEOPLE AGAINST THE EX POST FACTO LAWS WHICH STANDS FOR THE LAWS THAT WERE PERMITTED WHEN THEY WERE COMMITTED , A PERSON WHO HAS COMMITTED AN OFFENCE AT THE TIME OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE OFFENCE IF THE ACT WAS NOT DEEMED AS CRIME RATHER WAS LAWFUL THEN IT CAN NOT LEAD TO A PERSON’S PROSECUTION . 


EXECPTIONS TO ARTICLE 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION 

  1. IT PROVIDES PROTECTION AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY WHICH MEANS THAT IT PROVIDES PROTECTION TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SUBJECTED TO PROSECUTION FOR THE SAME OFFENCE TWICE . IT ACTS AS AN EXCEPTION UNDER THE AMBIT OF THE LAW OF ARTICLE 20 

  2. ARTICLE 20 PROTECTS THE PEOPLE AGAINST POST FACTO LAWS , WHICH ACTS AS A PROTECTION TO THE ARBITARY USE OF POWER OF PROSECUTING PERSON UNDER THE THEN LAWFUL ACTS WHICH BECAME UNLAWFUL IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO . 

  3. IT ALSO PROTECTS PEOPLE AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION WHICH MEANS THAT IT PROVIDES FOR THE PROTECTION AGAINST  THE FORCEFUL  SELF INCRIMINATION OF THE CRIMINALS BY THE POLICE , THIS PROVISION IS MADE ON THE HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS WHICH SPEAKS FOR THE HUMANITARIAN APPROACH OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM . 


UNDER ARTICLE 20(3) THE NARCOANALYSIS TESTS WHICH ARE CONDUCTED BY THE EXPERTS TO EXTRACT TRUTH OUT OF THE CRIMINAL IN ORDER TO REACH TO A CONCLUSION IN A CASE IS PROHIBITED AND IN THE CASE OF SELVI VS STATE OF KERELA 2010 CASE WGHERE THE COURT HELD THAT NARCO ANALYSIS TESTS CONDUCTED BY THE AUTHORITIES AGAINST THE WILL OF A PERSON IS ARBITARY AND IS VOID UNDER THE PREROGATIVE OF ARTICLE 20(3) , IT IS AN ABUSE OF POWER BY THE AUTHORITIES 


CONCLUSION 

ARTICLE 20 OF THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES RIGHTS NOT ONLY TO CITIZENS BUT ALSO TO THOSE WHO ARE NON RESIDENTS , THE RIGHTS PROVIDED BY THE ARTICLE IS SOLELY BASED ON THE HUMANITARIAN APPROACH OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE NATION , INDIA  HAS ALWAYS BATTED FOR THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE AND CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN THE PROTECTOR OF THOSE HUMAN RIGHTS , PROVISIONS PROVIDED UNDER THE ARTICLE 20 WHICH PROTECTS PEOPLE AGAINST POST FACTO LAW AND AGAINST THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY WHICH ARE A BASIS FOR THE ARBITARY AND A REGRESSIVE APPROACH OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM, UNDER ARTICLE 20(3) THE COURT HAS DISCOURAGED THE PROVIDING OF EVIDENCE IN THE COURT AGAINST THE WILL OF THE CRIMINAL THROUGH FORCED SELF INCRIMINATION AND FORCEFUL NARCOANALYSIS TESTS , AS PER THE CASE OF SELVI VS STATE OF KERELA THE COURT DECIDED THAT ANY ACTION DONE AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PERSON TO GET THE FACT OUT OF HIM IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IS NULL AND VOID UNDER THE ARTICLE 20(3) AND ARTICLE 21 . 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more