ROSHAN LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE constitutional validity of section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, was unsuccessfully challenged in Banwarilal and another v. The State (A. I. R. 1956 Alld. 341). The Bench negatived the contention that the provisions of section 342 of the Code are violative of Art. 20(3) of the Constitution of India. Before the Bench hearing the above noted oases it was urged that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad (A. I. R. 1961 S. G. 1808). the authority of the judgment of this Court in the case referred to above has been shaken. Reference was also made to the views expressed by Seervai in his treatise Constitutional Law of India and Durga Das Basu's viewing in his Commentary on the Constitution of India. It was felt that the question of validity of sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 342 of the Code requires reconsideration and consequently of following question has been referred to a Full Bench:-

(2.) THE principle of protection against compulsion of self-incrimination was adopted in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the U. S. A. of which the relevant part is:-

(3.) THIS protection against self-incrimination is clubbed which the guarantee in the Fourtn Amendment which provides:-