Fundamental Rights Analysis

This question concerns fundamental rights related to criminal proceedings, primarily covered under Article 20 of the Constitution.

Protected Rights Under Article 20

• Ex Post Facto Law: Option 4 correctly states the protection against conviction for an act not considered an offence at the time it was committed. This is guaranteed under $\text{Article } 20(1)$.
• Double Jeopardy: Option 1 describes the protection against prosecution and punishment more than once for the same offence. This is guaranteed under $\text{Article } 20(2)$.
• Self-Incrimination: Option 3 refers to the right not to be compelled to testify against oneself. This is guaranteed under $\text{Article } 20(3)$.

Unprotected Right: Handwriting Sample

Option 2 suggests a right to refuse to give a handwriting sample. While $\text{Article } 20(3)$ protects individuals from being compelled to be a witness against themselves (testimonial compulsion), the Supreme Court has interpreted this narrowly.

Providing a handwriting sample is generally considered a physical act, not testimonial evidence. Therefore, it does not fall under the protection against self-incrimination. An individual can be compelled to provide a handwriting sample, making the refusal to do so not a fundamental right.

Conclusion: The right to refuse to give a handwriting sample as evidence is not a fundamental right provided.