Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Right To Fair Trial: Introductory
Right To Fair Trial: Introductory
INTRODUCTORY:-
A trial primarily aimed at ascertaining truth has to be fair to all concerned which includes the
accused, the victims and society at large. Each person has a right to be dealt with fairly in a
criminal trial. Denial of a fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as it is to the victim and
society. An accused has a right to fair trial. Under our Constitution as also the international
treaties and conventions, the right to get a fair trial is a basic fundamental/human right 1. He has a
right to defend himself as a part of his human as also fundamental right as enshrined under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The right to defend oneself and for that purpose to
adduce evidence is recognized by the Parliament in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 243 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. "Fair trial" includes fair and proper opportunities allowed
by law to prove her innocence. Adducing evidence in support of the defence is a valuable right.
In a criminal case, denial of that right means denial of fair trial. This issue now stands concluded
by decision of Ho’nble Apex Court in Kalyani Baskar (Mrs.) v. M.S. Sampoornam (Mrs.)
[(2007) 2 SCC 258].
1
Dwarka Prasad Agarwal (D) By LRs. v. B.D. Agarwal and Others [(2003) 6 SCC 230]
1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF FAIR TRIAL:- As was well-said on 14th March,1785 letter
from Benjamin Franklin to Benjamin Vaughan, it is better that ten guillty escape than one
innocent suffers.
Presumption of innocence:
In State of U.P. v. Naresh and Ors.,[ (2001) 4 SCC 324] the Supreme Court observed “every
accused is presumed to be innocent unless his guilt is proved. The presumption of innocence is a
human right subject to the statutory exceptions. The said principle forms the basis of criminal
jurisprudence in India.”
In Kali Ram v. State of H.P., [ (1973) 2 SCC 808]the Supreme Court observed “it is no doubt
that wrongful acquittals are undesirable and shake the confidence of the people in the judicial
system, much worse; however is the wrongful conviction of an innocent person. The
consequences of the conviction of an innocent person are far more serious and its reverberations
cannot be felt in a civilized society.”
Khatri v State of Bihar (where it was held that an accused is entitled to free legal services).
Hussainara Khatoon v State of Bihar, (where it was held that a speedy trial is an essential
ingredient of fair trial procedure and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to set up a
procedure that would ensure the same)
The concepts of double jeopardy and the right against self incrimination have also been
examined in the light of recent case laws such as Selvi v State of Karnatakawhere the Court
concluded that a Narco analysis test violates this right.
In Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and ors v. State of Gujarat and ors., [ (2006) 3 SCC 374 at 395]
The Supreme Court of India observed “each one has an inbuilt right to be dealt with fairly in a
criminal trial. Denial of a fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as it is to the victim and to
society.
Section 50 provides that any person arrested without warrant shall immediately be informed of
the grounds of his arrest. The duty of the police when they arrest without warrant is to be quick
to see the possibility of crime, but they ought to be anxious to avoid mistaking the innocent for
the guilty. The burden is on the police officer to satisfy the court before which the arrest is
challenged that he had reasonable grounds of suspicion.
In Pranab Chatterjee v. State of Bihar[ (1970) 3 SCC 926] the court held that Section 50 is
mandatory. If particulars of offence are not communicated to an arrested person, his arrest and
detention are illegal. The grounds can be communicated orally or even impliedly by conduct.
Section 57 of Cr.P.C. and Article 22(2) of Constitution provides that a person arrested must be
produced before a Judicial Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. In State of Punjab v. Ajaib
Singh[AIR 1953 SC 10] the court held that arrest without warrant call for greater protection and
production within 24 hours ensures the immediate application of judicial mind to the legality of
the arrest.
The decisions of the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh[1994 SCC (4)
260] andD.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal[1997 (1) SCC 416], were enacted in Section 50-A
making it obligatory on the part of the police officer to inform the friend or relative of the
arrested person about his arrest and also to make an entry in the register maintained by the
police. This was done to ensure transparency and accountability in arrest. Sec.160 of Cr. P.C
provides that investigation by any police officer of any male below 15 years or any woman can
be made only at the place of their residence. Section 46(4) provides that no woman shall be
arrested after sunset and before sunrise, save in exceptional circumstances and where such
exceptional circumstances exist, the woman police officer shall, by making a written report,
obtain the prior permission of the Judicial Magistrate of the first class within whose local
jurisdiction the offence is committed or the arrest is to be made.
Conclusion:-
Indian law is in consonance with the prevailing international legal standards on the tright o be
tried by a competent and independent and impartial court. All persons must be equal before the
court. Every one shall be entitled to a fair trial by an impartial court established by law. A salient
requirement of fair trial is one without undue delay. The right to a speedy trial flowing from
Article 21 of the Constituiton encompasses all the stages such as investigation, inquiry, trial,
appeal, revision and re-trial. In a criminal case, a conviction cannot be based on the testimony of
witnesses whose examination in chief stands contradicted by their cross-examination. Basic
concept behind a fair trial is succinctly explained, . in Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi),
(2010) 6 SCC 1. A reasoned judgment diminished the chances of appeal, and reduces the courts
overload. Appreciation of evidence must be rational and dispassionate. In every criminal trial the
degree of probability of guilt has to be much higher, almost amounting to certainty; and if there
is the slightest reasonable or probable chance of innocence of an accused the benefit must be
given to him.
---x----