CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Directions: Read the passage and answer the ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.
Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.
Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.
Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.
Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:
  • a)
    Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.
  • b)
    Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.
  • c)
    Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.
  • d)
    Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Art...
Understanding the Context
Mr. A, a law student, expressed his opinion on social media regarding a government policy, prior to the amendment that introduced 'Hate Speech' as an offense. The key question revolves around whether he can be prosecuted under this new amendment.
Implications of Article 20(1)
- Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws.
- This means individuals cannot be convicted for actions that were not offenses at the time they were committed, nor can they face increased penalties for these actions retroactively.
Analysis of Mr. A's Situation
- Mr. A posted his blog on April 19, 2020, before the amendment defining 'Hate Speech' as an offense.
- According to Article 20(1), he cannot be prosecuted for an act that was not an offense at the time of its commission.
Why Option A is Incorrect
- The assertion that Mr. A may be liable because his blog was not removed post-amendment overlooks the principle of legality established by Article 20(1).
- The critical factor is that the blog was published before the law was enacted, not whether it was removed afterward.
Conclusion
- Therefore, Mr. A may not be liable for the offense of Hate Speech as he acted before the law was in place.
- The correct interpretation aligns with the protections offered under Article 20(1), affirming that Mr. A's actions were not criminalized at the time they occurred.
In summary, Mr. A’s blog, posted before the amendment, cannot be deemed an offense under the new Hate Speech laws, making option 'c' the correct choice instead of 'a'.
Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Art...
This is the most suitable answer for the following question.
After analyzing the statement "An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog.” – it shows that the provision was applicable when it was brought against him.
If in the case the blog was active even after the new provision was introduced, then Mr A is liable.
Hence, this is the correct option.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. The expression Ex Post Facto Law means a law, which imposes penalties or convictions on the acts already done and increases the penalty for such acts. In other words, Ex Post Facto Law imposes penalties retrospectively. For example, The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 came into force from 20.5.1961. A person guilty of accepting dowry is punishable under the Act after 20.5 .1961 and not before 20.5.1961. Ex post facto laws are of three kinds as follows: (a) A law which declared some act or omission as an offence for the first time after the completion of that act or omission. (b) A law that enhances the punishment or penalty for an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence. (c) A law that prescribes a new and different procedure for the prosecution of an offence subsequent to the commission of that offence.Clause (1) of Art. 20 provides protection only in respect of the above first two categories of ex post facto laws i.e., laws that declare acts as offences subsequent to the commission to those acts and laws which enhance the penalty subsequently.Article 20(1) provides: No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. The first part of clause (1) provides that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for a violation of law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence. The second part of the clause (1) protects a person from a penalty greater than that which he might have been subjected to at the time of the commission of the offence.Q. Mr. A is a student of Law, aged 19 years. He is socially active and expresses his opinion on every social and political event of the nation through social media platforms. In one of his blog, he severely criticised the policy of a state government of changing the names of cities and towns. He also stated that the government is biased towards a particular religion. The said blog was posted on 19th April 2020 and subsequently, an amendment was made to the Indian Penal Code whereby 'Hate Speech' was made a distinct offence and punishment was prescribed. An action was brought against him under the said provision for the blog. Now, choose the most appropriate option amongst the following:a)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as the blog was not removed even after the amendment.b)Mr. A may be liable for the offense of Hate speech as Article 20(1) does not cover such areas.c)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense because the act was done before the amendment.d)Mr. A may not be liable for the offense as his blog was an innocent and fair criticism.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev