Duty of court docket to offer significant authorized help to accused at State’s expense: Supreme Court

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Thursday stated it’s the obligation of the court docket to offer applicable and significant authorized help to an accused on the State’s expense.

The high court docket stated the State should guarantee a good defence to an accused, and it’s the obligation of the court docket to see and be sure that an accused placed on a felony trial is successfully represented by a defence counsel.

A 3-judge bench headed by Chief Justice UU Lalit made the remark whereas setting apart the dying sentence to a person below Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murdering his spouse and 4 youngsters in Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh in 2010.

“Though the offence is gruesome and revolts the human conscience but an accused can be convicted only on legal evidence and if only a chain of circumstantial evidence has been so forged as to rule out the possibility of any other reasonable hypothesis excepting the guilt of the accused,” the bench stated.

It stated that within the occasion on account of indigence, poverty or illiteracy or another disabling issue, if an accused shouldn’t be capable of have interaction a counsel of his alternative, it turns into the obligation of the court docket to offer him applicable and significant authorized help on the State expense.

“What is meant by the duty of the State to ensure a fair defence to an accused is not the employment of a defence counsel for namesake. It has to be the provision of a counsel who defends the accused diligently to the best of his abilities.”

“While the quality of the defence or the caliber of the counsel would not militate against the guarantee to a fair trial sanctioned by Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, a threshold level of competence and due diligence in the discharge of his duties as a defence counsel would certainly be the constitutional guaranteed expectation,” the bench additionally comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and J B Pardiwala stated.

The presence of counsel on document means efficient, real and devoted presence and never a mere farcical, sham or a digital presence that’s illusory, if not fraudulent, it stated.

Justice Pardiwala, who wrote the 93-page judgement on behalf of the bench stated, indigence ought to by no means be a floor for denying honest trial or equal justice.

“Therefore, particular attention should be paid to appoint competent advocates, equal to handling the complex cases, not patronising gestures to raw entrants to the Bar.c Sufficient time and complete papers should also be made available to the advocate chosen so that he may serve the cause of justice with all the ability at his command, and the accused also may feel confident that his counsel chosen by the court has had adequate time and material to defend him properly,” the highest court docket stated.

The apex court docket stated this case “provides us an opportunity” to remind the District and Sessions Judges throughout the nation conducting periods trials, extra notably referring to critical offences involving extreme sentences, to nominate skilled attorneys who had performed such instances prior to now.

“It is desirable that in such cases senior advocate practising in the trial court shall be requested to conduct the case himself or herself on behalf of the undefended accused or at least provide good guidance to the advocate who is appointed as amicus curiae or an advocate from the legal aid panel to defend the case of the accused persons.”

“Then only the effective and meaningful legal aid would be said to have been provided to the accused,” it stated.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Thursday stated it’s the obligation of the court docket to offer applicable and significant authorized help to an accused on the State’s expense.

The high court docket stated the State should guarantee a good defence to an accused, and it’s the obligation of the court docket to see and be sure that an accused placed on a felony trial is successfully represented by a defence counsel.

A 3-judge bench headed by Chief Justice UU Lalit made the remark whereas setting apart the dying sentence to a person below Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murdering his spouse and 4 youngsters in Lakhimpur Kheri district of Uttar Pradesh in 2010.

“Though the offence is gruesome and revolts the human conscience but an accused can be convicted only on legal evidence and if only a chain of circumstantial evidence has been so forged as to rule out the possibility of any other reasonable hypothesis excepting the guilt of the accused,” the bench stated.

It stated that within the occasion on account of indigence, poverty or illiteracy or another disabling issue, if an accused shouldn’t be capable of have interaction a counsel of his alternative, it turns into the obligation of the court docket to offer him applicable and significant authorized help on the State expense.

“What is meant by the duty of the State to ensure a fair defence to an accused is not the employment of a defence counsel for namesake. It has to be the provision of a counsel who defends the accused diligently to the best of his abilities.”

“While the quality of the defence or the caliber of the counsel would not militate against the guarantee to a fair trial sanctioned by Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, a threshold level of competence and due diligence in the discharge of his duties as a defence counsel would certainly be the constitutional guaranteed expectation,” the bench additionally comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and J B Pardiwala stated.

The presence of counsel on document means efficient, real and devoted presence and never a mere farcical, sham or a digital presence that’s illusory, if not fraudulent, it stated.

Justice Pardiwala, who wrote the 93-page judgement on behalf of the bench stated, indigence ought to by no means be a floor for denying honest trial or equal justice.

“Therefore, particular attention should be paid to appoint competent advocates, equal to handling the complex cases, not patronising gestures to raw entrants to the Bar.c Sufficient time and complete papers should also be made available to the advocate chosen so that he may serve the cause of justice with all the ability at his command, and the accused also may feel confident that his counsel chosen by the court has had adequate time and material to defend him properly,” the highest court docket stated.

The apex court docket stated this case “provides us an opportunity” to remind the District and Sessions Judges throughout the nation conducting periods trials, extra notably referring to critical offences involving extreme sentences, to nominate skilled attorneys who had performed such instances prior to now.

“It is desirable that in such cases senior advocate practising in the trial court shall be requested to conduct the case himself or herself on behalf of the undefended accused or at least provide good guidance to the advocate who is appointed as amicus curiae or an advocate from the legal aid panel to defend the case of the accused persons.”

“Then only the effective and meaningful legal aid would be said to have been provided to the accused,” it stated.