Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 302 and 324 IPC; Sections 273 and 309 CrPC; Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act; Articles 21, 22 and 39A of the Constitution of India.
Judgement By: Kerala High Court.
Judge/Bench: Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K. V. Jayakumar
Facts
The case relates to a 2011 incident in which the accused was charged with murder and causing hurt. Even though bail was granted early, he remained in jail for almost 14 years while the case moved slowly. The trial went on for years with frequent adjournments. Many key witnesses were examined when the accused had no lawyer or was not present in court. In 2019, the Sessions Court convicted him, which he challenged before the High Court.
Key Legal Provisions
Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act
Articles 21, 22 and 39A of the Constitution of India.
Issues Raised
Whether a long, delayed and irregular trial in a custodial case violates the right to a fair trial?
Arguments of the Case
The accused argued that the manner in which the trial was conducted caused serious injustice. The State defended the conviction.
Judgement
The High Court held that the accused did not receive a fair trial. The long delay, lack of proper legal help, and procedural lapses violated his constitutional rights. The conviction was set aside, the accused was acquitted, and ordered to be released immediately.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
