Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
(In Death Reference No.1/2022)
For the Petitioners:Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Amicus Curiae, Mr. Satya Narayan Prasad, APP, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate, Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate
(In Criminal Appeal (DB) No.203/2022)
For the Appellants:Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate, Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Satya Narayan Prasad, APP, Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra, Amicus Curiae
For the Informant:Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate, Mr. Munish Om Prakash Singh, Advocate

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:

1. Principles of natural justice require that an accused in a criminal trial must be given an impartial hearing by an unbiased judge. The fairness of the trial is fundamental and cannot be compromised, especially in cases involving severe penalties such as death (!) (!) .

2. The right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution emphasizes that no person should be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to established procedure that is reasonable, just, and fair. The trial process must uphold these constitutional guarantees (!) (!) .

3. The procedural safeguards prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)—such as the supply of police reports, statements, and documents to the accused—must be strictly followed to ensure the accused’s right to be informed and to prepare a proper defense. Any breach of these provisions can result in a miscarriage of justice (!) (!) .

4. The trial must be conducted with adequate time and opportunity for the accused to understand the charges, prepare a defense, and lead evidence, particularly in serious and complex cases. Immediate recording of evidence and rapid proceedings without proper procedural adherence violate principles of natural justice and compromise the fairness of the trial (!) (!) .

5. The recording of evidence in the absence of the accused, especially when conducted through remote means without ensuring their presence or the opportunity for effective communication with counsel, undermines the right to a fair trial. The mandatory requirement that evidence be taken in the presence of the accused is a fundamental aspect of procedural fairness (!) (!) .

6. The trial process must be free from undue haste and should not be rushed to meet extraneous considerations. The judiciary must ensure that the principles of natural justice are upheld at every stage, including framing charges, recording evidence, and pronouncing judgment. Conducting proceedings in a manner that suggests bias or predetermination violates the right to an impartial tribunal (!) (!) (!) .

7. The conduct of the trial in this case demonstrated a disregard for procedural law, including the supply of documents, the opportunity to defend, and the presence of the accused during evidence recording. Such procedural lapses can lead to a conclusion that the trial was not fair and that the principles of natural justice were breached (!) (!) (!) .

8. The timing and manner of judgment—delivered shortly after hearing arguments and without proper opportunity for defense—raise concerns about the impartiality and fairness of the trial process. The court must ensure that judgments are based on a thorough and reasoned evaluation of the entire case record (!) (!) .

9. The trial process must be transparent, and any appearance of bias or prejudice, whether actual or perceived, can undermine the legitimacy of the proceedings. The judge's impartiality is a cornerstone of justice, and any conduct suggesting bias or predetermination must be scrutinized and rectified (!) (!) .

10. When procedural violations are identified that impact the fairness of the trial—such as inadequate time to prepare defense, absence of accused during evidence, or hurried judgments—the appropriate remedy is to set aside the previous proceedings and order a de novo trial from the stage before framing of charges (!) .

In summary, the core principles emphasize that a fair, just, and impartial trial is essential, and strict adherence to procedural safeguards, timely opportunity for defense, and unbiased conduct of the court are fundamental to upholding constitutional rights and ensuring justice.