Article 20 Of Indian Constitution
Hello Friend’s, In this post “Article 20 Of Indian Constitution | Protection Against Conviction of Offences“, We will read about “Article 20 of the Indian Constitution” In Details with In-depth Analysis. So…
Introduction (Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offences)
Article 20 of the Indian Constitution grants protection against arbitrary and excessive penalization to a suspicious person, whether or not citizen or foreigner, or legal person sort of a company or an organization.
Provision of Article 20 of the Indian Constitution
IT CONTAINS THREE PROVISIONS IN THAT DIRECTION:-
- No ex-post-facto law: No person shall be, (i) convicted of any offence except for violation of a law force at the time of the commission of an act, nor (ii) subjected to a penalty greater than the prescribed by the Law within the force all the time of the commission of the act.
- No double jeopardy: no person shall be prosecuted and penalized for an equivalent offence more than once.
- No self-incrimination: no person suspect of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
An ex-post-facto law is one that imposes penalties retrospectively (retroactively) that is upon acts already done are which the penalties for such acts.
The enactment of such Law is prohibited by the first provision of Article 20
In other words, civil liability or tax can be imposed retrospectively. further, this provision prohibits only convictions or sentence under an and ex post facto criminal law
Finally, the protection immunity under this provision cannot be claimed in case of preventive detention or demanding security from a person. protection against double jeopardy is available only in the proceeding before a court of law or a judicial tribunal.
In other words, it is not available in the proceeding before departmental or administrative authorities as they are not of judicial nature. the protection against double jeopardy is available to both oral evidence and documentary evidence.
However, it does not extend to,
- Compulsory production of material objects,
- Compulsory to give thumb impression, Specimen signature, blood specimens
- Compulsory Exhibition of the body.
Smt.Selvi vs the State of Karnataka
In May 2010, the supreme court in the case Smt. Selvi vs the State of Karnataka held that macro, polygraph, and brain mapping tests to be unconstitutional as they violate Article 20 (3) of the Indian constitution
Protection of women from domestic violence actor 2005
Delhi High Court in 2010 rule that there is no difference between the women who were subjected to domestic violence that took place before the formation of the act and for the right to equality the relief under the act should we sought even if the case held before the formation of the act.