SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 390

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
Vikram Singh Indroi S/o Sh. Chug Singh Ji - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 320/2023
Decided On : 07-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. Priyanka Borana
For the Respondent: Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG assisted by Mr. N.S. Chandawat

The court affirmed the right to a fair trial under Article 21, allowing video conferencing for accused in judicial custody to prevent delays in proceedings.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Article 21 - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 273 - Criminal writ petition seeking permission for accused to attend trials via video conferencing due to multiple FIRs across Rajasthan - Court recognized procedural burden and potential violation of right to a fair trial - Consolidation of cases directed for efficient judicial process. (Paras 2, 3, 4)

(B) Right to Fair Trial - The court emphasized the necessity of ensuring the accused's presence through video conferencing to avoid delays in proceedings and uphold the right to a speedy trial. (Paras 3, 4)

(C) Judicial Efficiency - The court urged the State Government to amend the CrPC to allow video conferencing for accused in judicial custody, ensuring effective judicial proceedings. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, facing multiple FIRs for financial crimes, sought permission to attend trials via video conferencing due to logistical challenges and the potential for prolonged proceedings.

Findings of Court:
The court allowed the petition, directing authorities to facilitate video conferencing for the accused to ensure timely trials.

Issues: The main issues included the feasibility of the accused's physical presence in multiple trials and the implications for the right to a fair trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that allowing video conferencing is essential to prevent delays and uphold the accused's right to a fair trial, especially given the logistical challenges of physical attendance.

Result: Petition allowed.

Order :

1. The instant criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners seeking permission to attend the pending criminal trials against him through video conferencing.

2. The petitioner is accused in multiple cases and is compelled to face criminal proceedings in the form of various FIR’s filed almost in every State of Rajasthan and it may increase in future. This Court vide order dated 23.08.2024 addressed the issue of multiple FIRs against the accused of financial crimes, leading to 259 cases across various districts. This court recognized the procedural burden and potential violation of his right to a fair and speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. This court has consolidated the cases into groups based on geographical proximity to facilitate a more efficient judicial process and directed the transfer of cases to specific district courts for consolidated trials, ensuring a fair trial without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations.

3. After perusing the material available on record and considering the submissions made, it is evident that the present petitioner seeks permission for attending the criminal trials pending against him through video conferencing. To start with, it is not feasible for the accused to be physically present at multiple locations simultaneously. In the event of simultaneous proceedings, his physical absence leads to adjournments, thereby causing unnecessary delay. It has also been noticed that, in accordance with Section 273 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter to be referred as “CrPC”), there exists no legal impediment if the accused is represented by his counsel. The relevant provision mandates that evidence be taken in the presence of the accused or, when his personal presence is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader. Thus, if required, the jail authorities may be directed to coordinate and ensure the accused’s presence through video conferencing. This would enable the proceedings to continue effectively and prevent them from being rendered idle or infructuous merely due to the absence of the accused.

4. This Court is of the view that the accused’s non-appearance may be attributed to various reasons, such as the need to maintain law and order, transportation difficulties from jail to the court, unavailability of the police escort team, or other logistical constraints. Considering that six years have already elapsed in the ongoing proceedings, if the accused is not permitted to appear through video conferencing, it may take an unreasonably long time, potentially several decades, to conclude the trial.

5. For a better understanding, Section 273 of CrPC is reproduced herein below:-

273. Evidence to be taken in presence of accused.—Except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader:

1[Provided that where the evidence of a woman below the age of eighteen years who is alleged to have been subjected to rape or any other sexual offence, is to be recorded, the court may take appropriate measures to ensure that such woman is not confronted by the accused while at the same time ensuring the right of cross-examination of the accused.]

Explanation.—In this section, “accused” includes a person in relation to whom any proceeding under Chapter VIII has been commenced under this Code.

STATE AMENDMENT

Gujarat

In section 273, after the words “in the presence of his pleader”, add the following words namely:-

“or, as the case may be, through the medium of Electronic Video Linkage when the court on its own motion or on an application so directs in the interests of justice” shall be added.

[Vide Gujarat Act 31 of 2017, sec. 2 (w.e.f. 30-8-2017).]

Jharkhand

In Section 273, after the words Äll evidence taken in the course of the trial or other

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top