'Production Of Accused In Court Fundamental To Criminal System': Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Seeking To Produce Undertrials In Court Virtually

Update: 2022-10-11 07:16 GMT
story

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions to prevent undertrial prisoners from being produced in court to ensure safety of judges, prisoners and others inside the courtroom. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice UU Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Bela M. Trivedi. While advising the petitioner to withdraw...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions to prevent undertrial prisoners from being produced in court to ensure safety of judges, prisoners and others inside the courtroom. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice UU Lalit, Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Bela M. Trivedi. While advising the petitioner to withdraw the petition, the bench underlined that an accused being produced in the court room was a fundamental part of the criminal justice system. 

At the outset, the petitioner submitted that it had become routine for undertrial prisoners to be produced in courtrooms in criminal cases and the same endangered lives of not just the prisoners themselves but also judges presiding over such cases. However, the bench was not convinced with the submission. Justice Bhat orally remarked–

"Personally speaking, an accused going to the court is fundamental is to our criminal system. The man who is in trial, that's the only time he can see his family."

The counsel for petitioner suggested that the undertrial persons may then be produced before the court virtually. While remarking that the idea was theoretically laudable, CJI Lalit questioned the implementation of the same. He recounted the time when he had visited a Bombay jail and said–

"In bombay, there are only six terminals, so then how many people can be produced by VC? Theoretically, the idea is good but how do we implement? This is one way to look at the problem but not the only way, sorry."

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

CASE TITLE: Rishi Malhotra v UOI W.P.(Crl.) No. 414/2021

Click Here To Read/Download Order



Tags:    

Similar News