A STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AND JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION AND BNSS & CRPC

AUTHOR – P. ELAVARASAN* & M.MOHANAPRIYA**

* 5TH YEAR B.A.LL.B, GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE VILUPPURAM

** II YEAR LLM (ENVIRONMENTAL LAW), CHENNAI DR.AMBEDKAR GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, PUDUPAKKAM

BEST CITATION – P. ELAVARASAN & M.MOHANAPRIYA, A STUDY OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AND JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION AND BNSS & CRPC, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 525-535, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT

This essay critically analyzes the connection between Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires the court to question the accused, and Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which protects the right against self-incrimination. The paper investigates how, when interpreted within their constitutional and procedural bounds, these provisions – despite their apparent differences in intent – can work in concert. As a fundamental protection, Article 20(3) makes sure that no one is forced to give testimony or evidence that might be used against them in a criminal case. On the other hand, Section 313 CrPC serves as a procedural tool that allows the accused to address or clarify incriminating facts that come up during the trial. The study clarifies that Section 313 is not essentially coercive but rather functions as a facilitative instrument that gives the accused a chance to tell their story by analysing statute provisions and judicial reasoning. The study also discusses the evidential limitations of remarks made in accordance with this clause, emphasizing that while they are acceptable for consideration, such responses do not alone have the standing of substantial evidence. The results highlight the need to apply Section 313 cautiously by the courts to prevent it from being used as a tool to close gaps in the prosecution’s evidence. The article comes to the conclusion that applying Section 313 CrPC in a way that is morally and constitutionally sound not only protects the right against self-incrimination but also enhances the fairness and integrity of the criminal justice system.

KEYWORDS: Accused’s Rights, Self-Incrimination, Procedural Fairness, Evidentiary Value, Natural Justice.