Judge Is Not A Mere Recording Machine; Must Actively Search For Truth In Trial : Supreme Court Sends Back Death Penalty Matter To HC

The Supreme Court On September 4 overturned a judgment of the Patna High Court which confirmed the death sentence of a convict for the offence of rape and murder of a 10 year old girl, after finding several faults with the High Court's approach. While remitting the matter for reconsideration by the High Court, the Supreme Court made strong observations about the concept of fair trial. The judgment was authored by Justice JB Pardiwala and it starts with a quote from Harry Browne:“A fair trial is one in which the rules of evidence are honored, the accused has competent counsel, and the judge enforces the proper court room procedures - a trial in which every assumption can be challenged.”The Court observed that free and fair trial is sine-qua-non of Article 21 of Indian Constitution. It elucidated: “If the criminal trial is not free and fair, then the confidence of the public in the judicial fairness of a judge and the justice delivery system would be shaken. Denial to fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as to the victim and the society. No trial can be treated as a fair trial unless there is an impartial judge conducting the trial, an honest, able and fair defence counsel and equally honest, able and fair public prosecutor. A fair trial necessarily includes fair and proper opportunity to the prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused and opportunity to the accused to prove his innocence.”The appeal assailed Patna High Court’s decision that had upheld the conviction and death sentence of the accused. The Bench, comprising Justices BR Gavai, JB Pardiwala and Prashant Kumar Mishra, set aside the impugned judgment and remitted the matter back to the High Court for deciding the death reference afresh.Previous report can be read here. Court’s Observations on Fair Trial What is the genesis of the concept of a fair trial?At the outset, the Court opined that the concept of a fair trial has a very impressive ancestry, is rooted in history, enshrined in the Constitution, sanctified by religious philosophy and juristic doctrines and embodied in the statute intended to regulate the course of a criminal trial. Its broad features and ingredients have, in course of time, been concretised into well recognised principles, even though there are grey areas, which call for further legal thought and research.India follows the accusatorial or adversarial systemThe Court emphasized that for the dispensation of criminal justice, India follows the accusatorial or adversarial system of common law. In the accusatorial or adversarial system, the accused is presumed to be innocent; prosecution and defence each put their case; judge acts as an impartial umpire and while acting as a neutral umpire sees whether the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt or not.Legal duty of a Judge to take an active role in the proceedings in order to find the truth to administer justiceThe Court further noted that truth is the cherished principle and is the guiding star of the Indian criminal justice system. For justice to be done truth must prevail. Truth is the soul of justice. The sole idea of criminal justice system is to see that justice is done. Justice will be said to be done when no innocent person is punished and the guilty person is not allowed to go scot free. The role of a judge in dispensation of justice after ascertaining the true facts no doubt is very difficult one. In the pious process of unravelling the truth so as to achieve the ultimate goal of dispensing justice between the parties the judge cannot keep himself unconcerned and oblivious to the various happenings taking place during the progress of trial of any case. No doubt he has to remain very vigilant, cautious, fair and impartial, and not to give even a slightest of impression that he is biased or prejudiced either due to his own personal convictions or views in favour of one or the other party. This, however, would not mean that the Judge will simply shut his own eyes and be a mute spectator, acting like a robot or a recording machine to just deliver what stands feeded by the parties.Thereafter, the Court highlighted the Malimath Committee on Judicial Reforms which elaborately discussed the paramount duty of Courts to search for truth. One of the observations made by the Committee was that “For the common man truth and justice are synonymous. So when truth fails, justice fails. Those who know that the acquitted accused was in fact the offender, lose faith in the system”Moving forward, it was observed that on several occasions the Apex Court has condemned the passive role played by the Judges and emphasized the importance and legal duty of a Judge to take an active role in the proceedings in order to find the truth to administer justice and to prevent the truth from becoming a casualty. A Judge is also duty bound to act with impartiality and before he gives an opinion or sits to decide the issues between the parties, he should be sure that...

Judge Is Not A Mere Recording Machine; Must Actively Search For Truth In Trial : Supreme Court Sends Back Death Penalty Matter To HC

Gyanvi Khanna

Tags