Chapters :
  • THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS – ABOLITION OF TITLES – 02

  • CASE 1: FREEDOM OF SILENCE – NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE

  • CASE 2: INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPER V/S UNION OF INDIA

  • ARTICLE 20: PROTECTION IN RESPECT OF CONVICTION FOR OFFENCES

  • CLAUSE 3: SELF INCRIMINATION LAW

THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS – ABOLITION OF TITLES – 02

CASE 1: FREEDOM OF SILENCE – NATIONAL ANTHEM CASE Three students from Kerala belonging to the denomination of Jehovah Witnesses were expelled from a school for refusing to sing the National anthem, despite the fact that they stood respectfully when it was sung. The students challenged their expulsion in the High Court of Kerala, which upheld their expulsion. They appealed to the Supreme Court, which held their expulsion invalid. The Supreme Court held that the students did not commit any offence under Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971. Also, their fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) includes the Right to Silence. CASE 2: INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPER V/S UNION OF INDIA The Supreme Court held that, though the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) does not explicitly include Right to Freedom of Press, it is implied implicitly in it. The State cannot impose any restriction on the Freedom of Press through laws. The true spirit of democracy is People’s Participation In Governance, which is encouraged by the press. Clause 2: It says that nothing in the subclause(a) shall prevent the State from putting in place reasonable restrictions to
  • Protect The Sovereignty And Integrity of the country;
  • Protect The Security of the country;
  • Protect friendly relations with the foreign countries
  • Maintain Public Order, Decency And Morality
  • Affairs related to the Contempt Of Court, Defamation And Incitement of offences.
Clause 3: It says that nothing in the subclause(b) shall prevent the state from imposing reasonable restrictions to
  • Protect The Sovereignty And Integrity of the country;
  • Maintain public order.
  Clause 4: It says that nothing in the subclause(c) shall prevent the state from imposing reasonable restrictions to
  • Protect the Sovereignty And Integrity of the country;
  • Maintain Public Order And Morality.
Clause 5: It says that nothing in the subclauses(d) and (e) shall prevent the state from imposing reasonable restrictions to
  • Protect The Interests Of General Public and
  • Protect The Rights Of Scheduled Tribes
 Clause 6: It says that nothing in the subclause(g) shall prevent the state from enacting laws related to the following
  • To specify qualifications To Practice Any Profession, Or An Occupation, Or A Trade Or A Business;
  • To exclude partially or wholly certain trade or industry or business from the practice by the general public and keep it under the control of the State.
The provision of reasonable restrictions to subclause(g) cannot be used to curb the freedom of press covered under subclause(a).
 ARTICLE 20: PROTECTION IN RESPECT OF CONVICTION FOR OFFENCES This article protects the Rights Of Individuals And Corporations, accused of an offence from the arbitrary actions of the State. The striking aspect of this article is that it cannot be suspended even duringan Emergency. It is available to both citizens and friendly aliens, not enemy aliens. CLAUSE 1: EX-POST FACTO LAW It says that no person shall be convicted for an offence done before the enactment of the law that makes it an offence. Also, no person shall be sentenced to punishments that are severe than those prescribed by the law at the time of commission of offence. CLAUSE 2: DOCTRINE OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY It says that no person shall be prosecuted and punishedfor an offence more than once. There is an exception to this provision, a public servant can be subjected to both the prosecution under a law of court and departmental proceedings for the same offence.
Prosecution: It is the process of conducting trails against an accused person to prove that he is guilty of an offence.
CLAUSE 3: SELF INCRIMINATION LAW It says that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself in any criminal case. The confessions are accepted only when they are voluntary and recorded by the Magistrates. This Clause thus grants the ‘RIGHT TO SILENCE’ to both the accused and the suspects.
The protection under Clause(3) of article 20 is not available to departmental proceedings against government servants.
Narco tests, DNA tests and lie detectors can be used to further the investigations, but the findings cannot be used as a testimony to prove a person to be guilty of an offence, as they are not accepted in the courts. The accused persons cannot be compelled to provide any document or samples of their possession, whereas if such documents and samples are collected during the investigation process, they are accepted in the courts. 
error: Content is protected !!
Scroll to Top