Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.
Bhagmal - Appellant
Versus
State Of M.P. - Respondent
Cr. App. No. 1675 of 2008
Decided on : 20-10-2008
Opportunity to be Heard - Criminal Appeal - The court set aside the judgment of the High Court and remitted the matter for fresh disposal after giving due opportunity of hearing to the accused No.6 and 11, or after appointing an amicus curiae to put forth their case.
Fact of the Case:
Eleven accused, including the appellants, were prosecuted for various offences under the Indian Penal Code. The trial court convicted and sentenced them, and all the accused filed an appeal before the High Court. However, none appeared for the appellants-accused during the appeal hearing.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence of the appellants without giving them an opportunity to put forth their case in the appeal. The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and remitted the matter for fresh disposal after ensuring the accused No.6 and 11 are given a fair opportunity to be heard.
Issues: Failure to provide an opportunity to be heard in the appeal before the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The principle of natural justice requires that parties should be given a fair opportunity to be heard before their rights are affected. The High Court's failure to ensure the appellants' representation violated this principle.
Final Decision: The judgment of the High Court was set aside insofar as the appellants were concerned, and the matter was remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal after ensuring due opportunity of hearing to the accused No.6 and 11, or after appointing an amicus curiae to put forth their case. The appeal was accordingly disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
R.V. Raveendran, J.
Leave granted. Heard counsel on both sides.
2. Eleven accused including the appellants herein (who were accused No.6 and 11) were prosecuted for offences under Section 302/149, 324/149 and 323 Indian Penal Code. The trial Court convicted and sentenced them to life imprisonment. All the accused filed an appeal before the High Court. When the appeal was listed for hearing on 6.6.2006, none appeared for the appellants-accused. The High Court heard the learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State and disposed of the appeal by confirming the conviction and sentence of the appellants (accused No.6 and 11) under Section 302 Indian Penal Code, and conviction of accused No.3 under Section 323 Indian Penal Code. It acquitted the other accused. Feeling aggrieved, accused No. 6 and 11 have filed this appeal by special leave.
3. None appeared for any of the accused at the time of hearing before the High Court. In the circumstances, the appellants' conviction has been affirmed without an opportunity to put forth their case in the appeal. The High Court ought to have given an opportunity or made arrangement for their representation.
4. In view of the above, the judgment of the High Court is set aside insofar as appellants (accused No.6 and 11) are concerned and the matter is remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal after giving due opportunity of hearing to accused No.6 and 11, or after appointing an amicus curiae to put forth their case. Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Appeal Disposed of.
AI
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
