Fair Trial Is Hallmark Of Criminal Procedure, Court's Duty To Ensure Fair & Proper Opportunities To Accused For Just Decision: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has observed that a fair trial is the hallmark of criminal procedure which entails not only the rights of the victims but also the interest of the accused. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri added that it is the duty of every Court to ensure that fair and proper opportunities are granted to the accused for just decision of the case. "In furtherance of the above, adducing of evidence...
The Delhi High Court has observed that a fair trial is the hallmark of criminal procedure which entails not only the rights of the victims but also the interest of the accused.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri added that it is the duty of every Court to ensure that fair and proper opportunities are granted to the accused for just decision of the case.
"In furtherance of the above, adducing of evidence by the accused in support of his defence is also a valuable right and allowing the same is in the interest of justice," the Court said.
The Court was dealing with a plea filed by an accused who is charged with sec. 304B of IPC. The plea challenged two orders passed Trial Court whereby petitioner's (accused in main trail) opportunity to cross-examine a prosecution witness was closed and the application filed under sec. 311 Cr.P.C. seeking recall of the said witness was dismissed.
It was submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that initially, both the father and the mother of the deceased were cited as prosecution witnesses. It was added that in order to safeguard the interest of the petitioner so that the prosecution witnesses may not improve upon their case, a request was made to the Trial Court for an opportunity to cross-examine both the witnesses on one day. However, the Court declined the request.
It was therefore prayed that one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to cross-examine one witness on a single day, on which day he will also conduct the cross-examination of the said witness.
Perusing the facts of the case, the Court said:
"Doubtless, the petitioner in the present case had ample opportunity to cross-examine the aforesaid witness but he did not utilise the same. Be that as it may, this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a fair trial is the hallmark of criminal procedure. It entails not only the rights of the victims but also the interest of the accused. It is the duty of every Court to ensure that fair and proper opportunities are granted to the accused for just decision of the case."
Considering the fact that the petitioner was charged for the offence punishable under sec. 304B of IPC and the witness was the father of the deceased, the Court granted one opportunity to the petitioner to cross- examine the said witness.
However, the opportunity was granted subject to cost of Rs.5,000 to be deposited by the petitioner with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of six weeks.
"On deposit of the cost, the Trial Court shall summon the aforesaid witness for one day, on which date, learned counsel for the petitioner shall conduct the cross-examination of PW-1 and no adjournment shall be granted in this regard," the Court said.
It added that in case the petitioner fails to cross examine the witness on the date fixed by the Trial Court and an adjournment is sought, his right to cross-examine the witness shall stand closed.
Case Title: KRISHAN KUMAR v. THE STATE (GNCT) OF DELHI
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 61