JUDGMENT

Index to the Judgment

PRELUDE

FACTUAL BACKDROP

SUBMISSIONS AT THE BAR

ISSUE BEFORE THIS COURT

CONCEPT OF FAIR TRIAL

(i) Fair Trial as a fundamental right of the accused

(ii) Ensuring Fair Trial to Accused Persons with Disabilities facing Criminal Trial: Constitutional Duty of the Courts

ROLE OF COURTS IN ELIMINATING DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION

RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 2016: AN OVERVIEW

(i) Objectives sought to be achieved by the Act

(ii) Relevant Provisions of the Act

ANALYSIS OF `THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 2016'

(i) `Access to Justice' under the Act

(ii) Efforts made so Far to give effect to Section 12 of the Act

(iii) Deficiencies and Inadequacies in the Act regarding Special Rights of an Accused with Disabilities facing Criminal Trial

COURT AS AN ADJUDICATOR AND HEALER

SUGGESTIONS AND DIRECTIONS

(i) Theoretical Possibilities And Practical Impossibilities

(ii) Existing Jurisprudence Lacking Provisions For Accused Persons With Disabilities

(iii) Equal Justice to Every Citizen

(iv) Suggestions to Give Effect to Section 12(4)(c) of Rights of Persons

with Disabilities Act, 2016

(v) Infrastructural Improvements and Other Suggestions

(vi) Identifying Legislative Gaps and Suggesting further Inclusions for Equal Access to Justice to Accused Persons With Disabilities: Constitutional Duty of Courts as Third Pillar Of Democracy

(vii) A Special Court Room For Accused Persons With Disabilities Similar To Those For Vulnerable Witnesses With Assisted Technology.

(viii) Directions for Effective Compliance

CONCLUSION: BREAKING THE WALL AND DISMANTLING THE BARRIERS OF DISCRIMINATORY ATTITUDE

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. The petitioner, by way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, seeks issuance of appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondent/State to constitute a Special Court as per Section 84 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and to make arrangements for the petitioner during the criminal trial which he is facing.

PRELUDE

2. The present case presents an opportunity to this Court to consider special measures to ensure actual access to justice to accused who suffer from disabilities by providing them facilities of assisted technology according to their disability in the Courts to ensure fair trial.

3. Vide this judgment, this Court not only examines the crucial issue of equality while administering justice to persons with disabilities as accuseds, but also examines the barriers in judicial system and the law, and tries to find out whether any directions can be issued to the appropriate authorities to provide necessary infrastructure and funds to remove the obstacles and inequalities suffered by persons with disabilities facing criminal trial in the criminal Courts.

4. It is crucial that this Court examine the question in view of the issue raised by the petitioner herein as to whether the judicial system itself has complied with the requirement of equality apropos a person with disability who is an accused or petitioner before the court of law, while it administers justice.

FACTUAL BACKDROP

5. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the petitioner, who is a deaf divayang since childhood and is also suffering from post traumatic stress disorder induced cataract of eyes resulting in weak blurred vision since 2012 and post traumatic fractured maligned jaw joint stiffness since December 2014, had got married to Ms. `X. in the year 1996. The parties were blessed with a child in the year 1997. Wife of the petitioner is also 70% differently-abled person i.e. Polio Orthopedically Disabled having suffered polio in her left lower limb. Matrimonial differences arose between the parties in the year 2012 and several complaints were filed by the complainant/wife on the ground of verbal and physical cruelty, with