Paper Title
Right to Remain Quiet during Investigation

The decision to remain quiet is a legal parameter which ensures any individual standing in the shoes of an accused with the option to refuse from addressing the inquiries made to him from the side of the police authorities in his greater interest. It is a lawful right that is expressly perceived by means of a significant number of general sets of laws. The option to remain unspoken is represented by the hypothesis called 'nemo debet prodere ipsum', which has got its direct bearing with the prospect against self-implication. The option of not criticizing oneself or to stay quiet is given to a blamed individual and pertinent to mention that the aforesaid privilege is perceived all throughout the nation. At the most, an accused individual has to express his willingness to remain quiet either at the hour of investigation or during police interrogation in order to avail his advantage so as to shield him from the responsibility of self implication. The right to remain silent retains its established recognition under the provision of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, which presents a tendency upon the denounced individual from being constrained to turn into a witness against oneself by giving self-implicating evidence for a situation. With the evolution of time, the periphery of this established doctrine has reached out to a significant degree owing to the broad expansion of its margin recognized by the courts. The option to remain quiet has got its different aspects. On one hand, it puts the weight on the State to demonstrate that the accused individual is blameworthy whereas on the other hand, it assumes that the charged individual is unblemished until he is being proved to be blameworthy as per the due process established by law. A conspicuous comparison of the decisions are being discussed by the authors keeping the paper inside the ambit of the established norms set by the Courts from time to time.