AUTHOR : HASHIM AK, BBA LLB (HONS) STUDENT, GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE KOZHIKODE
Abstract
This article delves into the inherent significance of the right to silence as a fundamental protection for individuals involved in legal proceedings but also form an integral part of the constitutional principles. The right to remain silent play a crucial role in ensuring the fairness and integrity of the legal process.This article analysis the right to remain silent, legal roots, limitations and other aspects.The right to remain silent is critically evaluated through judicial interpretation in adverse and inverse scenarios.This article shed light on the need of the right to remain silent in democratic setup to protect the interest and freedom of its citizen.
Introduction
The right to remain silent is one of the most important fundamental right in India which protects against self incrimination.The inability for an individual to not be able to speak as and when required on an allegation made against him can either be ascertained as acceptance or rejection of the allegation made.With the right to silence is a crucial safeguard.In some instances silence may be construed as an admission of guilt.
The right to remain silent Is a cornerstone of justice, safeguarding individuals from coerced confessions and guaranteeing an impartial trial.The jurisprudence surrounding the right to silence has evolved over the years, with Indian courts upholding the principle as a vital safeguard in criminal proceedings.Upholding the fundamental right to silence is crucial for preserving the integrity of India’s judicial system and guaranteeing a fair trial for all accused persons.
Meaning
The right to silence is a fundamental legal principle that protects individuals from being compelled to testify against themselves or to provide evidence that may incriminate them.It is based on the Latin maxim “nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare” which means, no man is bound to accuse himself. The right to silence is a fundamental principle rooted in the protection against self-incrimination, which is guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India.This provision envisages that no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.This includes the decisions remain silent during interrogations or court proceedings, thus proving an instrument in preventing forced or compelled confessions proceedings, which would violate an individual’s rights and compromise the reliability of the legal process.
Remaining silent cannot be considered non-cooperation, as individuals have the right to choose not to speak.The courts clarified that cooperation with an investigation should not be seen as an admission of guilt.The silence of a person under investigation for the commission of an offence is not indicative of his or her guilty consciousness and should be construed as an admission by silence due many reasons.The inability of the accused to fully understand and answer the questions and the case of nervousness are some instances when the accused become silent.
Legal Context
- Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which confers right against self-incrimination including right to remain silent is a fundamental right.
- Section 22 of the Indian evidence act , 1872 deals with the relevancy of the oral evidence regarding the terms of the documents.
- Section 114 E of the Indian evidence act,1872 grants the court the authority to make certain presumptions based on the common course of natural events, human behavior, absence of statements.
- Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is to giving the accused an opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing in the evidence against them and to respond to the accusations made during the trial.
- Section 315 of code of criminal procedure,1973 state that any person accused of an offence shall be a competent witness for the defence and may give evidence on oath in against of the charges made against him.
- Section 161(2) of code of criminal procedure,1973 states that any person shall be bound to answer the questions relating to a case put to him by investigation officer.
All this legal context recognizes the right to remain silent.
Case laws
- Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani : Supreme Court acknowledged the right to silence but also considered the various circumstances under which the silence could be interpreted adversely. The court observed that if the accused fails to give a reasonable explanation for his silence when confronted with evidence, it may be taken into consideration in the overall evaluation of guilt.
- State of Gujarat v. Anirudh Singh Udaisinh Jadeja : Supreme Court clarified that while an accused person has the right to remain silent during police interrogations.
- State of Maharashtra v. Damu : Supreme Court delves into the implications of silence during police interrogation.The Apex Court, in its decision emphasized the importance of the right to silence as a constitutional safeguard.The Apex Court highlighted that the prosecution has the burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the accused is under no obligation to prove their innocence.It also point out the balance between the right to silence and the permissible inference that can be drawn from police interrogation.
- Oscar Fernandez v. State of Karnataka : High Court of Karnataka, has observed that when the accused remains silent during the trial and examination under section 313 of CrPC. The accused would have opportunity to deny any allegations against him during investigation.
- State of Haryana v. Ram Singh : The Supreme Court held that when the accused person remains silent during the conduct of the trial and does not have any further explanation for the charges against him, then the Court will assume it as an implied admission of guilt.
- State of Punjab v. Sodhi Sukhdev Singh : Supreme Court held that silence could only amount to an admission in circumstances that called for an answer or a denial.Silence cannot always be equated with guilt and that each case must be assessed.
- Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala : Supreme Court upheld the right to silence of three children who were expelled from school because they refused to sing the National Anthem.The right to speak and the right to express includes the right not to express and to be silent.
Limitations
- An accused may be compelled to provide non-testimonial evidence, such as fingerprints, photographs, or DNA samples.
- Courts may draw adverse inferences from an accused’s silence under specific circumstances.
- In cases involving national security or organized crime, the balance between individual rights and public safety may lead to limitations on the right to silence
- Article 20(3) applies only to those persons who are accused of an offence. It does not apply to a witness as the witness is not being accused of a crime.
- Protection under Article 20(3) is not available to a person who is being interrogated under several legislations like the Customs Act, 1962 and Foreign Exchange Management Act,1999.
- The right to silence is limited only to criminal cases.
- Judiciary also may not sympathize with the person remaining silent in a suspicious manner.
International Context
- Right to remain silent are available in around 108 countries in the world.
- The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 includes some aspect of right to silence in Article 11(9).
- The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), to which India is a party, sets out various safeguards for individuals accused of crimes, including the aspects of the right to remain silent.
Conclusion
In India, the right to remain silent is a significant fundamental right that is often associated with the broader concept of the right against self-incrimination.The right to silence is a critical component of the Indian legal framework, ensuring that individuals are protected from self- incrimination. While this right is well-established, practitioners should be aware of the exceptions that may apply, particularly in cases involving public safety or specific judicial interpretations that allow for adverse inferences.Granting the right to remain silent recognizes the autonomy of individuals and their right to make choices in legal situations.The Courts in India approach the issue with care and caution considering the complex human nature and the specifications of case. Silence must be understood by not just as the absence of words, but as a result of complex human behaviour due to various reasons.
FAQ
1.What is he right to remain silent?
A. The Right to remain silent can be understand as the right to not speak in investigation or court proceedings when we are compelled or forced.
2. What is the constitutional aspect of the right to remain silent?
A. Article 20(3) of Indian constitution accounts for the right to remain silent.
3. Whether the right to remain silent is available in all cases?
A. No, The right to silent is only available in criminal cases.
4. Whether all person have the right to remain silent?
A. No, only the accused of a criminal case can have the right to remain silent under article 20(3) of Indian constitution.
5. What is the judicial view of the right to remain silent?
A. Indian judiciary has taken a positive response in the right to remain silent while upholding strict guidelines for its implication.
