RIGHT TO SILENCE IN INDIA – AN ANALYSIS OF ITS SCOPE, USE AND EFFICACY

Abstract

This article aims to understand the scope of the right to silence in India with respect to criminal cases. Incidents involving coercion on accused with an aim to extract evidence is a common occurrence in this country. Had the Constitution framers not included the right against self-incrimination, then the incidents of custodial brutality, compelled testimony would have been even higher. Inspite of the right guaranteed to the citizens under article 20(3) of the Constitution against self-incrimination, use of physical, psychological, emotional duress on the inmates by the investigation officials have made detrimental impacts on the effect of the justice delivery system. Right to silence, if properly extended to the accused, can help in curtailing incidents of compelled testimony. The right to silence provides a scope as comprehensive as possible in order to save the accused from undue vilification by the investigating agencies to Court officials. Therefore, right to silence can hence be called as a legal safeguard against answering or to refuse answering any question put forward to any accused by the Court or any official authorised to interrogate the accused, if that question has a potential to incriminate him or her. 

Chapter 1 of the article analyses whether this right to silence can be called a fundamental right, owing to the fact that it has no particular mention in any constitutional article or sections of any penal statute. Chapter 2 discusses the effectiveness of this right in protecting the interests of the accused. In addition to this, Chapter 3 of the article inspects into the areas where this right can or cannot extend, thereby judging if this is an absolute right or not, and if the exercise of the right to silence has been of any prejudice to the prosecution while interrogating the accused in a criminal case.