Back
2018 Supreme(SC) 1365
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.A. Bobde, L. Nageswara Rao, JJ.
Satyajit Hazari - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1290-1291 of 2005
Decided On : 15-02-2018
Mr. Nikhil Goel, Ms. Naven Goel, Mr. Ashutosh Ghade, Advocates and Mrs. Sheela Goel, AOR, for the Appellants; Mr. Debojit Borkakati, AOR and Mr. M. Balashivudu, Advocate, for the Respondent
Non-production of contraband as a material object in a trial and conviction process can lead to a fatal flaw and invalidate the judgment and order.
Headnote:
Contraband - Trial and Conviction - The court found fatal flaw in the trial and conviction process due to the non-production of the contraband as a material object, leading to the setting aside of the judgment and order passed by the High Court.
Fact of the Case:
The trial and conviction proceeded on a fatal flaw as the contraband was not produced before the Court as a material object.
Finding of the Court:
The judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside due to the fatal flaw in the trial and conviction process.
Issues: Non-production of contraband as a material object, mention in the Malkhana Register, and the validity of the trial and conviction.
Ratio Decidendi: The non-production of the contraband as a material object led to a fatal flaw in the trial and conviction process, rendering the judgment and order passed by the High Court invalid.
Final Decision: The appeals are allowed, and the bail bonds of one appellant are discharged, while the other appellant is to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
ORDER
1. We have heard learned counsel for both sides.
2. We find that the trial and the conviction proceeded on a fatal flaw that the contraband, for the possession of which the appellants had been prosecuted and convicted has itself not been produced before the Court as material object. Consequently, neither the attention of the accused was adverted to the said contraband nor the Court has had any opportunity to see the contraband which is allegedly found in the appellants' possession. Such flaw on the prosecution side is discussed in the case of Gorakh Nath Prasad v. State of Bihar (Criminal Appeal No. 2104 of 2017) : (2018 ALL SCR(Cri) 237) decided on 05.12.2017.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there is a mention to this effect in the Malkhana Register. Shri Nikhil Goel, learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that even this Register was not produced before the Court. In any case, we find that an entry in the Malkhana Register cannot be a substitute of producing the contraband before the Court as a material object. The judgment and order passed by the High Court is, therefore, set aside.
4. Since appellant-Stayajit Hazari(Criminal Appeal No. 1290/2005) is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand discharged.
5. The appellant Rabindra Singha (Criminal Appeal No. 1291/2005), who was released earlier vide order dated 04.02.2016 and was taken into custody pursuant to order dated 21.09.2017, shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
6. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed.
