Skip to main content
Adhikar is an independent citizen-awareness initiative — not a Government of India website.
Art. 20 Part III: Fundamental Rights

Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offences

Exact text — Constitution of India

(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.

(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.

In Plain English

What this Article actually means

Three classic criminal-law protections in one Article. Clause (1) bars ex post facto (retrospective) criminal laws — you can't be punished under a law that didn't exist, or given a heavier penalty than what was on the books, when you actually committed the act. Clause (2) is the 'double jeopardy' protection — you can't be tried and punished twice for the same offence. Clause (3) protects against self-incrimination — you cannot be forced to testify against yourself.
Why This Matters To You

How it shows up in everyday life

This is why a new, harsher criminal law (like the 2023 BNS replacing the IPC) can't be used to punish something more severely than the law that existed when you actually did it; why you can't be tried again for a crime you were already acquitted or convicted of; and why you can politely decline to answer self-incriminating questions during a police interrogation.

Landmark Cases

How courts have interpreted this Article

Selvi v. State of Karnataka(2010) 7 SCC 263 — Held that compulsory narco-analysis, polygraph and brain-mapping tests on an accused person without consent violate Article 20(3)'s protection against self-incrimination. Verify this case
Frequently Asked

Quick answers about Article 20

Can I be forced to give a DNA sample or blood test?
Courts have generally distinguished between physical evidence (which can often be compelled) and compelled testimonial/communicative evidence (protected under Article 20(3)) — the exact line has been litigated across different types of tests.
Does 'double jeopardy' apply to a departmental inquiry and a criminal trial for the same conduct?
Not automatically — a departmental/disciplinary proceeding and a criminal prosecution are usually treated as distinct, since they serve different purposes (service conduct vs. criminal punishment), so both can proceed for the same underlying conduct.

The text above reproduces Article 20 of the Constitution of India as amended to date, for general educational reference. It is public-domain legislative text, but we recommend cross-checking the authoritative version at legislative.gov.in or india.gov.in before relying on it for a legal matter. The explanation, examples and FAQs are general information, not legal advice — consult a qualified advocate for guidance on your specific situation.