Article 20(3) states that no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. This applies in the case of . . . . . . . .

Consider the following statements:
Article 20 of the Constitution of India provides that
1. No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
2. No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A

1 only

B

2 only

C

Both 1 and 2

D

Neither 1 nor 2

Consider the following statements with regard to protection in respect of conviction for offences:
1. In the case of Sampath Kumar v. Enforcement Directorate, Madras, it was held that it is unconstitutional to give a caution to speak the truth.
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.
4. Criminal law in India can be enacted retrospectively.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A

1, 2 and 4

B

2, 3 and 4

C

2 and 3

D

3 only

Assertion (A): An accused person cannot be compelled to give his thumb impression.
Reason (R): An accused person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself.

A

Both A and R are true

B

Both A and R are false

C

A is false but R is true

D

None of these

The doctrine against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) runs to state that "no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself." With respect to the above, response the following:

A

Protection is available to the accused

B

Protection is against the statement made under compulsion

C

The statements which may not result in self-incriminating evidence

D

Protection is not available during police custody

That "no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself" is a/an:

A

Directive Principle which the State should apply while enacting criminal laws

B

Human right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which India is a party

C

Fundamental right

D

Ordinary Constitutional right

Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, in respect of confessional evidence
1. So much of the information as it relates distinctly to the fact discovered in consequence of information received from the person accused may be proved against him.
2. Person giving such information must be accused of an offence.
3. Accused need not be in the police custody.
4. Any statement of the accused confessing his guilt must be made in presence of a Magistrate, in all cases, whether anything is discovered or not in consequence of such statement, may be proved against him.

A

1 and 2 are true

B

2 and 3 are true

C

3 and 4 are true

D

1 and 4 are true

PRINCIPLES: 1. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defense.
2. When an act, which would otherwise be a certain offence, is not that offence, by reason of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of that person or by reason of misconception on the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defense against that act, which he would have if that act were an offence.
3. Everyone has the right to defend their life and property against criminal harm provided it is not possible to approach public authorities and more harm than that is necessary has not been caused to avert the danger.
4. If in the exercise of right of private defense against an assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private defense extends to the running of that risk.
5. The right of private defense continues as long as apprehension of danger continues.
FACT: A enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter. Z, in good faith, taking A for a housebreaker, attacks A.

A

A has no right of private defense because it is available against an offender only

B

A has the same right of private defense against Z, which he would have had if Z was not acting under a misconception

C

A has exceeded his right of private defense

D

None of the above

An advocate who is accused-
1. Of a criminal offence is entitled to conduct his own defence
2. Of a criminal offence is not entitled to conduct his own defence
3. With others of a criminal offence is not entitled to appear at the trial as counsel for his co-accused
4. With others of a criminal offence is entitled to appear at the trial as counsel for his co-accused

A

1 and 3

B

1 and 4

C

2 and 3

D

2 and 4

X had made some communications to his wife Y during their marriage under Section 122 of the Evidence Act, the correct proposition are:
1. X can be compelled to disclose such communications before the Court, if Y consents, in any proceeding.
2. X can be compelled to disclose such communication whether Y consents or not in any proceedings
3. Y can be compelled to disclose such communication whether X consents or not in a divorce proceedings between them
4. Y may be permitted by Court, if deems fit, to disclose any such communication in a criminal proceedings not between X and Y.

A

1, 3, 4 are not correct

B

1, 2, 3 are not correct

C

2, 3, 4 are not correct

D

2, 4 are not correct

The fundamental rule of criminal jurisprudence regarding selfincrimination has been given constitutional status under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India. It is.
1. A right to refuse brain mapping test.
2. Not a protection against giving specimen signature and thumb impression.
3. A right pertaining to a person who is an eye witness to a crime.
4. A protection to a person against giving evidence against himself.
Select the correct answer:

A

1 and 3

B

1, 2 and 4

C

2 and 4 only

D

4 only

Article 20(3) states that no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. This applies in the case of . . . . . . . .

Related Questions