trial Court must control the dilatory tactics of any of the parties - Indian Supreme Court order dated 16.8.2022

-

 


Supreme Court - Daily Orders

S. Murugan @ Muruga vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh delivered on 16 August, 2022

                                                         


                                             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


                                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                           CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1250/2022

                                              [@ SLP [CRL.] NO.4655/2022]




                         S. MURUGAN @ MURUGA                                          Appellant(s)


                                                        VERSUS


                         THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR.                           Respondent(s)



                                                      O R D E R

On 17.11.2015, almost seven years back, an incident occurred where the assailants entered the office of the Mayor in Chittor District along with a pistol by wearing masks and trespassed into the Chambers of the Mayor during day time and committed the murder of the Mayor and shot her dead with a point blank range with a pistol. After threatening officials, the assailants escaped from the scene. The charge sheet has already been filed and the trial is going on.

We may note that the role assigned to the appellant before us is that he was sitting besides Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by BALA PARVATHI Date: 2022.08.16 the driver in the vehicle where the assailants 17:58:55 IST

Reason:

On 19.07.2022, A-2, undisputedly the principal accused, was granted bail by the High Court. On 01.08.2022, we issued notice to the State to obtain instructions about the same more so, in view of the role assigned to the appellant in facilitating the escape of the persons who assaulted the deceased. The aforesaid fact is accepted.

The complainant/injured witness was impleaded in the present proceedings as second respondent on 20.05.2022. The counsel for the complainant/injured witness strongly opposes the grant of bail. It is his submission that though A-2 may have been granted bail, the complainant/injured witness has filed an application seeking cancellation of the bail on account of the threat to the witnesses, protraction of the trial by the accused and it is his say that the entire gamut of the facts were not before the Court when A-2 was granted bail. That the appellant should not be granted bail merely on account of parity with A-2 more so, when the application for cancellation of bail is pending consideration.

On hearing learned counsel for the parties, we may notice that there is something in what the learned counsel for the complainant/injured witness says, i.e. the appellant should not be enlarged on bail merely on account of parity with A-2. We have thus considered the role of the appellant.

Learned counsel for the complainant/injured witness has much to say even about the role of the appellant but we would have to look to the charge sheet to see that with what is charged with. He has been roped in along with other accused on account of conspiracy and the fact that he was sitting in the vehicle in which the assailants escaped. Now, the most material aspect is that the appellant before us has been in custody for almost 7 years, the trial has not proceeded albeit on report of the trial Court more specifically directed qua the manner in which A-1 is not letting the trial proceed. The High Court has directed the trial to proceed expeditiously.

We are troubled by the fact that seven years after the incident the prosecution witnesses have not been examined and the trial is yet to commence. This is completely unacceptable. Time lag creates its own problems in the testimony of the witnesses more so the eyewitnesses.

It is the duty of the prosecution to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are available and it is the duty of the trial Court to ensure that none of the parties is permitted to protract the trial.

We are thus, of the view that the trial Court must control the dilatory tactics of any of the parties and all steps must be taken to ensure that post-trial, the judgment of the trial Court is available within a period of one year from the date of the communication of this order.

We are, however, inclined to grant bail to the appellant considering the role ascribed to the appellant in the charge sheet and the total period spent in custody. Ordered accordingly. This is subject to such conditions that the trial Court may impose. We in addition make it clear that the appellant would be required to be present personally before the trial Court on all dates and would facilitate in the trial. If the trial Court finds that the appellant is endeavouring to delay the trial, or thereafter temper with the evidence, we authorize the trial Court to cancel the bail and put the appellant in custody.

Insofar as the application for cancellation of bail of A-2 is concerned, we make it clear that the same will be decided on its own merits and the order passed today would not in any manner facilitate A-2 in those proceedings. The appeal is allowed in terms aforesaid leaving the parties to bear their own costs.


……………………………………………….J.


[SANJAY KISHAN KAUL] ……………………………………………….J.


[M.M. SUNDRESH] NEW DELHI;


AUGUST 16, 2022.








Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CIVIL PROCEDURE AMENDMENT NO 43 OF 2024

-
Image
  defult of appearance - An overview  by GalleLaw Blogger  on the amendment 43 of 2024 to section 86, 87 and 88 to the CPC  VACATION OF exparte ORDERS, JUDGMENTS AND DECREES. The Civil Procedure Code (Ordinance No. 2 of 1889) governed case procedures in the Original and Appellate Courts for nearly 85 years, from 1889 until 1974, when it was replaced by the Administration of Justice Laws No. 44 of 1973 and No. 25 of 1974. During a brief period from 1974 to 1977, the Civil Procedure Code was superseded by the AJL. However, in 1977, the Civil Procedure Code of 1889 was reinstated by the Civil Courts Procedure (Special Provisions) Law No. 19 of 1977. Section 86 of the Civil Procedure Ordinance outlined the procedures for setting aside a decree *nisi*  (a provisional judgment)  under the CPC ordinance. Under Section 86(2), if a defendant provides reasonable grounds for the default, the court was empowered to set aside the decree and resume the case from the s...
Read more

What law governs the granting or remanding of an accused or suspect person? The law that governs the granting or remanding of an accused or suspect person is the Bail Act No. 30 of 1997. This Act provides for the release on bail of persons suspected or accused of being concerned in committing or having committed an offense. It also provides for the granting of anticipatory bail and other related matters. The Bail Act establishes that the grant of bail should be the guiding principle, subject to exceptions as provided for in the Act, and refusal to grant bail should be the exception. It prevails over the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act and other written laws, except for the Release of Remand Prisoners Act, No. 8 of 1991.

-
Image
  SUMMARY BY THE BLOGGER    Background:  The accused has been indicted for the offense of grave sexual abuse of a minor, an offense is punishable under section 365B (2) (b) of the Penal Code. The accused was initially released on bail by the Court. The trial against the accused commenced on 21-07-2022. On 5th October 2023, the Court ordered the accused to be remanded pending further trial. The Lawyer for the accused filed a motion seeking bail, but it was refused.   The petitioner, acting on behalf of the accused, filed an application for revision in the Court of Appeal invoking Article 138 of The Constitution. After considering the facts, circumstances, and relevant law, the Court ordered the immediate release of the accused from remand custody on the earlier bail conditions.   1.   The Court relied on section 263 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act to remand the accused, but failed to consider the relevant provisions of the Bail Act No. 30 of ...
Read more