( ISSN 2277 - 9809 (online) ISSN 2348 - 9359 (Print) ) New DOI : 10.32804/IRJMSH

Impact Factor* - 6.2311


**Need Help in Content editing, Data Analysis.

Research Gateway

Adv For Editing Content

   No of Download : 33    Submit Your Rating     Cite This   Download        Certificate

PROTECTION AGAINST EX POST FACTO LAWS AND INDIAN LEGAL SCENARIO: AN ANALYSIS

    1 Author(s):  MANOJ KUMAR SADUAL

Vol -  5, Issue- 12 ,         Page(s) : 302 - 309  (2014 ) DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/IRJMSH

Abstract

Abstract A principle is well settled that for every action one is going to get the reaction but nowhere in any document or any scriptures is the action defined. Certain actions of man in one period are considered good and in another bad. Certain actions are considered to be legal at one time of time and illegal at another. It is this inconsistency in man to decide what is good and bad that has become the reason to have immunity from ex post facto laws. An act that was thought innocent at the time of its commission is no longer innocent today but is illegal. These changing circumstances may lead to wrongful punishment of many innocent individuals. In this context the questions arise: For what reason the ex post facto laws are justified and if not then what is the remedy available for protection against such ex post facto laws? How the Apex Court of the country the highest judicial forum and final court of appeal under the Constitution of India has played its role in providing the protection against ex post facto laws? This paper attempts to find out the answers to all these questions. This paper also investigates the theory and scope of the constitutional principle against retrospective imposition of detriment expressed in the maxim nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. It makes an examination of key issues involved in the implementation of the principle.

1. From the Latin for "from something done afterward"
2. Black. Black's Law Dictionary. West Group, 2007.
3. Corwin (1958), the Constitution and What It Means Today, (New York, Clarity Pub.)
4. Available at http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/197601/ex-post-facto-law
5. James Kent (1860), Commentaries on American Law, (Little, Brown and Company)
6. The maxim states that there can be no crime committed, and no punishment meted out, without a violation of penal law as it existed at the moment the alleged offence occurred. 
7. Thomas McIntyre Cooley (1999), Treaties on the Constitutional Limitations Which Rest Upon the Legislative, (The Lawbook Exchange Ltd.)
8. ICCPR, 1966
9. This is one of the relatively few restrictions that the United States Constitution made to both the power of the federal and state governments before the Fourteenth Amendment.
10. 3 U.S. (1 Dall.) 386, 390 (1798) (opinion of Chase, J.).
11. Ashran Jen (2004), Stogner v. Califirnia: A Collision between the Ex Post Facto Clause and California’s Interest in Protecting Child Sex Abuse Victims, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology,Vol.94.
12. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
13. "Pakistan Act 1990", Government of the United Kingdom.
14. Lord Denning in Macarthys Ltd v Smith [1979] ICR 785 at p. 789, quoted in Steiner, Josephine; Woods, Lorna; Twigg-Flesner, Christian (2006). "Section 4.4.2: Effect of the European Communities Act 1972, s.2 (1) and (4)". EU Law (9th ed. ed.). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. p. 79. ISBN 978-0-19-927959-3. “If the time should come when our Parliament deliberately passes an Act with the intention of repudiating the Treaty or any provision in it or intentionally of acting inconsistently with it — and says so in express terms — then ... it would be the duty of our courts to follow the statute of our Parliament”.
15. "Will retrospective taxes affect us all?", BBC News, 5 February 2010. 
16. Kanaiyalal v. Indumati, AIR 1958 SC 444: 1958 SCR 1394.
17. Wealth Tax Commr., Amritsar v. Suresh Seth, AIR 1981SC 1106
18. Prof.M.P.Jain(2004), Indian Constitutional Law,(Wadhwa, Nagpur)
19. AIR 1960 SC 266: (1960) 2 SCR 89.
20. AIR 1986 SC 293
21. AIR 1984 SC 1194
22. AIR 1965 SC 444
23. AIR 1953 SC 394
24. AIR 1977 SC 2279
25. Sunderaramier &Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1958 SC 468.
26. Jawala Ram v. Pepsu, AIR 1962 SC 1246.
27. Union of India v.Sukumar, AIR 1966 SC 1206.
28. Shiv Bahadur v. Vindhya Pradesh, AIR 1953 SC 394.
29. AIR 1964 SC 464
30. AIR 1961 SC 838.
31. T.Barai v. Henry Ah Hoe, AIR 1983 SC 150.
32. Sardar Gyan Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1975 Pat.69.
33. AIR 2000 SC 1650
34. AIR 1995 SC 1531     

*Contents are provided by Authors of articles. Please contact us if you having any query.






Bank Details