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

2023 Supreme(HP) 42

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SATYEN VAIDYA, J.
Court on its Own Motion - Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and Another - Respondents
Cr.MMO No. 489 of 2022
Decided On : 13-01-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate, as Amicus Curiae.
For the Respondents:Mr. Desh Raj Thakur, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Narender Thakur, Deputy Advocate General.

Point of Law: Section 317 of Code of Criminal Procedure reads as Provision for inquiries and trial being held in absence of accused in certain cases.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 09, 273, 317 – Physical condition - Not able to personally appear in Court - Registry of this Court received a written request from learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. seeking permission to visit place of accused to conduct trial in case (Sessions Trial) titled, pending before said Court – It was submitted that accused was bedridden as a known case of “fracture C-5 with quardiplegia” leading to permanent loss of function – He was not able to move from one place to another, although, his memory and speech was normal – Due to physical condition, accused is not able to personally appeared in Court to the trial. [Para 7]

Finding of the Court: It also cannot be ignored that recording of evidence through video conferencing is permissible subject to fulfillment of certain conditions – In appropriate cases, such mode can also be made available – In light of above discussion, instant petition is disposed of with direction to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba to proceed with trial of Case (Sessions Trial), titled in terms of observation made hereinabove. Since trial is already delayed, it is expected from learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba that same will be concluded as expeditiously as possible – Keeping in view peculiar circumstances of case, Deputy Commissioner, Chamba is directed to provide all assistance to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba for purpose of holding of proceedings of above noted case through video conferencing, if required.

Result: Disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

The Registry of this Court received a written request dated 20.4.2022 from learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. seeking permission to visit the place of accused to conduct trial in case No. 27 of 2017 (Sessions Trial) titled as State of H.P. vs. Naresh Kumar, pending before the said Court. It was submitted that the accused Naresh Kumar was bedridden as a known case of “fracture C-5 with quardiplegia” leading to permanent loss of function. He was not able to move from one place to another, although, his memory and speech was normal.

2. The above noted request was ordered to be treated on judicial side and, as such, the instant matter came for adjudication before this Court.

3. Keeping in view the nature of the matter, Sh. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae. The record of the case (Sessions Trial) No. 27 of 2017 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba was also requisitioned.

4. It is revealed from the record that learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, District Chamba, H.P. took cognizance of offence under Section 304-AA IPC against accused Naresh Kumar and passed committal order.

5. The gist of allegation against the accused is that on 09.12.2015 while driving vehicle (Tata-Sumo) bearing registration No. HP-02-0185 he caused the accident, as a result of which, the vehicle fell into a deep gorge. The other occupant of the vehicle namely Sh. Joginder Singh died on the spot, as a result of injuries suffered in the accident. The accused is alleged to be driving the vehicle at the time of accident under intoxication. ‘Ethyl Alcohol’ is stated to be present in the blood sample of the accused.

6. The accused himself suffered 100% disability on account of injuries suffered by him in the accident. A copy of disability certificate issued by a Medical Board in respect of the accused is on record, which reveals his diagnosis as “fracture C-5 resulting in quardiplegia”. His disability has been assessed at 100% in relation to whole body. The disability of the accused is also stated to be permanent.

7. With the disability suffered by the accused, he is stated to be not able to move and is further stated to be permanently bedridden. Due to the physical condition, accused is not able to personally appeared in the Court to face the trial. The matter was repeatedly adjourned for presence of the accused, but for the reasons noted above, his presence could not be procured by the Court.

8. In the above background, the following order came to be passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba on 17.01.2022 :

    “Present: Sh. Uday Singh, Ld. PP for the State.

Accused is not present.

Case file taken up today for proper order. The record shows that in this case, accused is not coming to the Court as he is reported to be bed-ridden. His medical condition is not good and keeping in view such medical condition of accused, an order dated 14.7.2021 was passed by my ld. Predecessor and in the last paragraph, he observed as follows:-

“Keeping in view the report of the Doctor and attending facts and circumstances of the case, accused is not in a position to move as such, request be made to the Hon’ble High Court to guide the further course of action to be conducted in the matter or to permit this Court to visit the place of accused to conduct trial in the matter as the case is pending since long for want of presence of accused and consideration on charge”.

Thus, my ld. Predecessor has observed that in view of the report of the Doctor, accused is not in a position to move and ordered to submit the request to Hon’ble High Court to guide the further course of action in the matter or to permit the Court to visit the place of accused to conduct trial in the matter. Since such order has been passed by my ld. Predecessor, therefore, let reference be submitted to the Hon’ble High Court through proper channel, in terms of order dated 14.7.2021 as passed by my ld. Prede

      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