Court case(1978) 2 SCC 424

Nandini Satpathy, a former Chief Minister of Orissa, was being investigated by the Vigilance police under the Prevention of Corruption Act for possessing assets disproportionate to her known sources of income. The Deputy Superintendent of Police handed her a long written questionnaire. She refused to answer, claiming the protection of Article 20(3) and section 161(2) CrPC. She was prosecuted under section 179 IPC (refusing to answer a public servant authorised to question). The Magistrate issued process and the High Court declined to quash it; she appealed to the Supreme Court.

Krishna Iyer J held that Article 20(3) and section 161(2) CrPC operate at the investigation stage: "accused of an offence" includes a suspect against whom an FIR has been lodged and who is being interrogated. The right to silence covers answers which would directly incriminate and also those that furnish a link in the chain of evidence; but it does not cover innocuous questions, and the accused cannot refuse to answer at all. Relevant answers in other pending cases are also protected. The Court said that the presence of a lawyer during interrogation should be allowed where the accused asks for it, and that the police must warn the suspect of the right to silence. The appeal was allowed with guidelines for the police.