Very Easy To Cross Thin Line Between Disposal Of Trial Without Unnecessary Delay & Over-Zealousness In Dispensation Of Justice: Rajasthan High Court

Setting aside a verdict in a POCSO case over undue haste shown by the trial judge, the Rajasthan High Court said that holding of a trial in a continuous fashion and on a day-to-day basis does not meant that the rights of either of the parties to a fair and reasonable trial should get hampered in the process of securing a faster conviction or acquittal

"Rather it is promulgated that the trial should proceed from day to day in the interest of both the prosecution as well as the defence," said the court. 

Justice Farjand Ali in the verdict said that orders and judgments passed by the courts must be in sync with the principles of natural justice.

The court added that the opportunity of hearing shall be considered to have been given when both the parties have had sufficient time to comply with the procedural steps of a criminal proceeding and formulate their arguments and defences at whichever stage of the trial it is so necessitated and mandated by the Code of Criminal Procedure.

"As the custodian of fundamental rights of the citizens of the country, it is the duty of the courts to be vigilant of trampling the rights of the accused as it is very easy to crossover the thin line drawn between disposal of a trial without unnecessary delay in accordance with the mandate of law and over-zealousness in dispensation of justice and final adjudication of a criminal proceeding. When all is said and done, criminal proceedings are matters concerning curtailment of civil liberties/personal liberties of an individual which are of utmost importance in any civilisation, thus, it is essential for trial courts to conduct the trial in an unbiased and fair manner and being mindful of the rights of both the parties," said the court.

If the methods used to reach the result of judicial diagnosis are not in accordance with the principles of law and justice, then the result itself cannot be said to be justified, said the court while remanding the POCSO case for fresh trial. 

Justice Ali also observed that justice is not intended to be imparted to one party of the lis only. Justice will be considered to be done when it will be imparted to all the parties affected as well as when done in larger societal interest, said the court.

"Complete justice is accomplished when it has reached to all the parties to the lis including the society." it added.

However, the court also clarified that its purpose of its observations is not that the trial judge should take longer in disposal of the case "but he/she/they shall be careful while conducting the trial expeditiously so as not to affect the rights of the parties."

"Promptness alone does not form a necessary part of the virtue of prudence," said the court.

The court also analysed the aspect of conviction and order of sentence passed on the same day. Justice Ali placed reliance on Bhagwani Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 2022 SC 527, wherein the Apex Court, while making a note of the hasty manner in which trial courts conduct trials in murder and rape cases, held that there should be a separate hearing on the point of sentence so that the accused gets sufficient time and fair opportunity to represent himself adequately.

While expounding on Sub-clause (2) of Section 235 of CRPC, which clearly states that once the accused has been convicted, he shall be heard on the question of the sentence and thereafter, sentence shall be passed, the bench said that hearing the accused has to be an effective hearing as the process of sentencing cannot be considered to be a stage which is subservient to the stage of deciding the guilt of the accused.

While observing that a reasonable amount of time is needed to be taken after passing of judgement of conviction, the court gave following reasons: 

i) There are multiple factors to be taken into account before passing an order of sentence like nature of the offence, the extenuating/mitigating and aggravating circumstances, previous criminal antecedents, age of the person who committed the offence, …. For any counsel to prepare for the hearing on point of sentence and for any judge to consider the submissions regarding these factors and pass an order of sentence, a reasonable amount of time has to be employed towards this aspect.

ii) Even if it is considered that sufficient time is provided in cases of same-day sentencing, the notion that the sentence was passed on the very same day as the passing of judgement of conviction raises serious doubts as to whether the factors discussed above were deliberated upon or not.

Case Title: Kamlesh vs. State Of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 244/2022

For Appellant(s): Ms. Anubha Singh

For Respondent(s): Mr. Rajendra Yadav, AAG with Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP, Mr. Vijay Singh Shekhawat

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment