31 August 2012

Section 304 of the Cr.P.C.- Legal aid to accused at State expense in certain cases. - Availing assistance of a lawyer to defend is fundamental right of an accused.

The honourable Supreme Court of India while deciding CRIMINAL APPEAL NO . 1091 OF 2006 filed by Mohd. Hussain @ Julfikar Ali has confirmed the right to fair trial as a fundamental right of an accused. The honourable Court, however, at the same time has held that, mere delay in trial cannot be a ground by itself to justify discontinuance of prosecution or dismissal of indictment. The honourable Supreme Court has further held that, the factors concerning the accused’s right to speedy trial have to be weighed vis-a-vis the impact of the crime on society and the confidence of the people in judicial system. On 30.12.1997 at about 6.20 p.m. one Blueline Bus No. DL-1P-3088 carrying passengers on its route to Nangloi from Ajmeri Gate stopped at Rampura Bus Stand at Rohtak Road for passengers to disembark. The moment the bus stopped, an explosion took place inside the bus. The incident resulted in death of four persons and injury to twenty-four persons. The FIR of the incident was registered and investigation into the crime commenced. On completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against four accused persons – one of them being the present appellant, a national of Pakistan – for the commission of offences under Sections 302/307/120- B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The appellant and the other three accused were committed to the Court of Session. The three accused other than the appellant before the honourable Supreme Court were discharged by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. The appellant was charged under Sections 302/307 IPC and Section 3 and, in the alternative, under Section 4(b) of the ES Act, and was then convicted and was awarded death sentence, which was confirmed by the honourable Delhi High Court. The honourable Supreme Court of India has declared that, the necessity of a counsel in a criminal trial is so vital and imperative that the failure of the trial court to make an effective appointment of counsel amounts to denial of due process of law. Absence of fair and proper trial would be violation of fundamental principles of judicial procedure on account of breach of mandatory provisions of Section 304 Cr.P.C. The honourable Supreme Court has directed de-novo trial of the accused from the stage of prosecution evidence. VAKILSAHEB

No comments: