https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169265 Article 20(3) applies once a formal accusation relating to an offence is made, even if the person is not specifically named, where the materials clearly connect him with the alleged offence. The privilege against self-incrimination protects only compelled answers that tend to incriminate; it does not excuse responses that are not self-incriminatory. On the facts, the arrest grounds and FIR linked the petitioner, as the bank officer in charge, to the same transaction, so he was treated as a person accused of an offence and could not be compelled to answer incriminating questions. en-us Wed, 24 Jan 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:24:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169265 Article 20(3) applies once a formal accusation relating to an offence is made, even if the person is not specifically named, where the materials clearly connect him with the alleged offence. The privilege against self-incrimination protects only compelled answers that tend to incriminate; it does not excuse responses that are not self-incriminatory. On the facts, the arrest grounds and FIR linked the petitioner, as the bank officer in charge, to the same transaction, so he was treated as a person accused of an offence and could not be compelled to answer incriminating questions. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Jan 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169265