Article 20(3) and Test Identification Parade: The
Question of Rights and Obligations
By- Anirudh Singh Malik
Introduction
Any democratic society's foundation is the idea of
justice and the protection of individual rights. Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution
stands out as an important clause among the many safeguards in place that
ensure justice and protect individual rights. It stipulates that no one who has
been charged with a crime shall be forced to testify against himself.This
fundamental principle has broad ramifications, particularly when it comes to
testing identification parades used to identify suspects in criminal
trials. Article 20 of the Constitution provides for the protection in respect
of conviction for offences. No one may be found guilty of an act that was not
unlawful when it was committed, and no one may receive a sentence that is
larger than that allowed by the law in effect at the time the crime was
committed. Additionally, no one may be required to testify against themselves or
be prosecuted and punished more than once for the same act. This article
explores the connection between Article 20(3) and test identification parades,
emphasizing the rights and responsibility connected to this significant
component of criminal justice.
Understanding Article 20(3)
Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution is part of
the Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. It reads,
"No person accused of any offense shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself." This constitutional provision places a strong safeguard
against self-incrimination, ensuring that an accused person cannot be forced to
provide evidence that would potentially implicate them in a crime.
Based on the idea that an accused individual shouldn't
be subjected to any force or compulsion that may jeopardize their right to stay
silent or prevent self-incrimination, the Constitution's founders added Article
20(3). This privilege is necessary to protect people from potential abuses by
law enforcement and to make sure that the burden of proof rests with the
prosecution.
Test Identification Parades
Law enforcement organizations utilize a test
identification parade, often known as a "TIP" or an "ID
parade," to determine if a witness is able to identify a suspect as a
criminal. Typically, several people with varied degrees of resemblance to the
suspect are displayed alongside the suspect. The next step is to ask the
witness to name the suspected offender. The credibility of witness testimony
and the link between the accused and the offense are both established through
this method. It aids in removing the chance of identification confusion, which
may result in unjustified arrests and convictions. TIPs do, however, come with
legal and ethical responsibilities. Constitutional norms, such as Article 20(3)
of the Indian Constitution, which forbids self-incrimination, protect the
freedom of suspects to decline participation. To avoid any subconscious
suggestions to the witness, the lineup must be fair and unbiased. To guarantee
the reliability and fairness of TIPs and contribute to the general integrity of
the criminal justice system, transparency and adherence to these rights and
processes are crucial.
Rights and Obligations in Test Identification Parades
Right to Refuse:The process of test identification parades is directly
impacted by Article 20(3) on the accused person's right to refuse. A defendant
has the right to decline to take part in such a procession. They cannot be
blamed for these reservations, and it does not indicate guilt. It gives
people the opportunity to defend themselves from potential mis identification
and is a direct extension of their right against self-incrimination.
Protections for Witnesses:To safeguard the rights of both witnesses and accused
people, test identification parades must be conducted in a fair and impartial
manner. It's important to let witnesses know that there's a chance the culprit
won't be in the lineup. The process must also be carried out without any
pressure or coercion, guaranteeing that the identification is completely based
on the witness's memories.
Responsibility of Law Enforcement: It is an obligation of law enforcement organizations
to carry out test identification parades precisely and with the utmost honesty.
This involves choosing lineup participants who are comparably dressed to the
suspect and making sure witnesses are not subjected to any pressure or
intimidation. Failure to do so may result in false identifications and
justiciable errors.
Role of Judiciary: The judiciary is essential to protecting the rights
of the accused and the accuracy of the identification procedure. To verify that
test identification parades were performed properly and without violating the rights
of the accused, courts must carefully review the evidence that was collected
from them.
In the case of Mukesh Singh Vs. State (NCT of
Delhi)-The Supreme Court observed that the conduct of Test Identification
Parade is not violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India. An
accused cannot resist subjecting himself to the TIP on the ground that he
cannot be forced or coerced for the same.
Conclusion
By shielding people against self-incrimination, Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution acts as a vital foundation of justice. The rights and obligations linked with this article are essential in ensuring that the identification procedure is accurate, fair, and in accordance with the rules of law when it comes to test identification parades. These protections, which are crucial for preserving the credibility of the criminal justice system and supporting the ideals of fairness and individual rights, benefit both the accused and the witnesses in criminal proceedings. It is essential that Article 20(3) continue to be a staunch defender of individual liberty, including in the context of test identification parades, as India's approach to criminal justice changes over time.
