Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. PATNAIK & MADAN B. LOKUR
Rajoo @ Ramakant
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 140 OF 2008
Decided on : 09-08-2012
Facts of the Case :
A Seven persons including R were alleged to have gang- raped G. The Trial Court convicted all of them for the offence . Appeals were filed by all the convicted persons .By its judgment and order High Court set aside the conviction in respect of five of the convicts, but upheld the conviction in respect of R and V. Only R appealed against his conviction and sentence.
B. Since appellant was not represented in the High Court, issue that arose for consideration was whether R was entitled, as a matter of right, to legal representation in the High Court.
Findings of the Court :
High Court was under an obligation to enquire from R whether he required legal assistance and if he did, it should have been provided to him at State expense. However, no indication in record of the case of any such endeavour having been made by High Court.Hence held appropriate that case ought to be re-heard by High Court after providing R an opportunity of obtaining legal representation. Appeal was disposed of by setting aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court and case records remitted back to High Court for a fresh hearing.
Result : Appeal disposed of
JUDGMENT :-
Madan B. Lokur, J.
After hearing arguments in this appeal, we had reserved judgment. While preparing the judgment, it was noticed that the appellant (Rajoo) was not represented in the High Court. The issue that arises, therefore, is whether Rajoo was entitled, as a matter of right, to legal representation in the High Court. Our answer is in the affirmative.
The facts:
On 06.12.1998, seven persons including Rajoo are alleged to have gang-raped ‘G’. The Trial Court convicted all of them for the offence and sentenced each of them to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default thereof they were required to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 3 months. Appeals were filed by all the convicted persons before the High Court. By its judgment and order dated 05.09.2006, the High Court set aside the conviction in respect of five of the convicts, but upheld the conviction in respect of Rajoo and Vijay. We have been informed that Vijay has accepted the judgment of the High Court. Only Rajoo has appealed against his conviction and sentence. Before us Rajoo was represented by learned counsel who took us through the material on record and made his submissions.
Constitutional and statutory provisions:
By the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution, effected in 1977, Article 39-A was inserted. This Article provides for free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other manner, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities. Article 39-A of the Constitution reads as follows:-
39A. Equal justice and free legal aid. – The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
Subsequently, with the intention of providing free legal aid, the Central Government resolved (on 26th September, 1980) and appointed the “Committee for Implementing the Legal Aid Schemes”. This committee was to monitor and implement legal aid programs on a uniform basis throughout the country in fulfillment of the constitutional mandate. Experience gained from a review of the working of the committee eventually led to the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short, the Act).
The Act provides, inter alia for the constitution of a National Legal Services Authority, a Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, State Legal Services Authorities as well as Taluk Legal Services Committees. Section 12 of the Act lays down the criteria for providing legal services. It provides, inter alia, that every person who has to file or defend a case shall be entitled to legal services, if he or she is in custody. Section 13 of the Act provides that persons meeting the criteria laid down in Section 12 of the Act will be entitled to legal services provided the concerned authority is satisfied that such person has a prima facie case to prosecute or defend.
It is important to note in this context that Sections 12 and 13 of the Act do not make any distinction between the trial stage and the appellate stage for providing legal services. In other words, an eligible person is entitled to legal services at any stage of the proceedings which he or she is prosecuting or defending. In fact the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee provides legal assistance to eligible persons in this Court. This makes it abundantly clear that legal services shall be provided to an eligible person at all stages of the proceedings, trial as well as appellate. It is also important to note that in view of the constitutional mandate of Article 39-A, legal services or legal aid is provided to an eligible person free of cost.
Decisions of this Court:
Pending the enactment of the Legal Services
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
