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

2005 Supreme(All) 1339

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Mahe Aalam
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh
Crl. Misc. Case 1548 of 2005
Decided On : 03 August 2005
Crl. Misc. Case 1548 Of 2005

Advocates:
Akhter Abbas,

Headnote:

Court of Session - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 230, 233, 243, 247, 254, 304 - The court held that in a trial before a Court of Session, the Court cannot direct or require the accused to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined by accused in his defence. The only condition on which any such prayer of accused can be refused is that such prayer has been made on the ground or for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice and these reasons for refusing has to be recorded. No other condition can be imposed by the Court i.e. by the Court of Session nor is recognized by the code.

Fact of the Case:

The court considered whether in a trial before the Court of Session, the Court can direct or require the accused to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined by him in defense.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accused cannot be directed to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined in his defense, except on the ground of vexation, delay, or defeating the ends of justice, and such reasons for refusal must be recorded.

Issues: The main issue was whether the Court of Session can require the accused to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined by him in defense.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused cannot be compelled to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined in his defense, except on the ground of vexation, delay, or defeating the ends of justice, and such reasons for refusal must be recorded.

Final Decision: The court set aside the orders directing the accused to deposit expenses and directed the trial court to reconsider the prayer for summoning witnesses in defense and dispose of the trial at an early date.

SHAILENDRA SAKSENA, J.

( 1 ) WHETHER in a trial before the Court of Session, the Court seized up with the trial, can direct or require the accused to deposit or pay the expenses of the witnesses sought to be examined by him in defence? has been raised in this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code only ).

( 2 ) ON this point of controversy involved in this petition, I have carefully heard the learned counsel of the parties and have perused the facts and the law on the points as well as the provisions of the Code, especially Sections 230, 233, Sub-section (3) of Section 233, Sections 243, 247, 254, and 304 of the Code.

( 3 ) THE Code provides a complete procedure for conducting a criminal trial. The provisions of the code ensure that for the purposes of trial, both the parties i. e. the prosecution and the accused stand on the same footing; there may be no discrimination between the two, so almost same or similar provisions for both the parties, have been made in the Code.

( 4 ) THE provisions of the Code not only safeguard the rights of the accused, they ensure that an accused gets a fair trial and is not pre- judiced or discriminated in any manner whatsoever. Even in case he is unable to engage a pleader of his choice in serious offences, legal aid is provided to him by providing a pleader to defend him. The right given is not only a mere formality but is an essential part of a criminal and a fair trial.

( 5 ) IN the Code, Offences have been categorized according to their nature and gravity, provisions have been made in the Code that offences according to their nature and gravity would be tried either by the Magistrate or Sessions Judge. The offences of graver nature, in which higher or severe punishment has been provided, are to be tried by Sessions Judge, and the rest by magistrates. The offences have further been categorized either as summons cases or warrant cases. The offences, which are to be tried as summons cases have been further been divided in two categories either triable by summary procedure or as a summons case.

( 6 ) FOR trial of these cases, either it be a summons case, warrant case or a sessions trial, detail procedure has been prescribed for conducting the trial. Chapter XVIII to XXI of the Code provide the procedure of conducting these trials. Chapter XXI of the Code provides the procedure for summary trials. In such trials, on the plea of the accused and his examination, if any, the findings are recorded and thereafter final orders are passed; if the accused does not plead guilty the Magistrate also, records the substance of the evidence, and delivers the judgment, containing brief facts, reasons and findings. No sentence of imprisonment of a term exceeding three months can be passed in case of conviction in a trial conducted under these provisions.

( 7 ) CHAPTER XX provides procedure for trial of summons cases by Magistrate and chapter XIX of the Code provides procedure of trial of case to be treated as a warrant case by Magistrate.

( 8 ) PROCEDURE for trial before Court of Session is provided in chapter XVIII of the Code. In all these chapters dealing with the trial and providing procedure thereof, without going into the technicalities regarding the procedure of trial, in all the trials i. e. under Chapters XVIII, XIX and xx the procedure is almost the same and similar, i. e. after the accused appears in the Court the particulars of the offence of which he is accused, is told to him and he is asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make, and whether he claims to be tried, thereafter evidence which the prosecution produces, in support of the charge, is recorded and thereafter the accused is heard and the evidence which the accused produces in his defence, is taken. In trials of summons cases by a Magistrate under chapter XX, the prosecution has to produce its witnesses, but on an application of the prosecution, Magistrate may issue su







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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