AI Overview...
-
Accused's Right to Examine Witness - The accused has a fundamental right to cross-examine witnesses. If this right is denied due to the fault of the advocate or court negligence, it can be grounds for closing evidence or affecting the trial's fairness. Courts have held that failure to allow cross-examination, especially when the delay is not the accused’s fault, impairs justice and can lead to acquittal or reversal of convictions State of Uttar Pradesh VS Shambhu Nath Singh - Crimes, State Of U. P. VS Shambhu Nath Singh - Supreme Court, Prakash Chandra Soni S/o Lt. Sh. Ram Vilas Soni VS State of Rajasthan, through P. P. - Rajasthan.
-
Fault of Advocate and Court’s Duty - The court's responsibility includes summoning and examining witnesses and ensuring the accused's rights are protected. If an advocate's absence or neglect prevents cross-examination, the court can provide opportunities, such as summoning the witness again or allowing another advocate, to uphold justice Raj Deo Sharma VS State of Bihar - Crimes, Mohinder Singh VS State of Punjab - Punjab and Haryana.
-
Closure of Evidence Due to Witness Absence - When witnesses are absent or evidence is not examined due to reasons beyond the fault of the accused, courts have sometimes closed evidence or acquitted the accused, emphasizing that such procedural lapses should not unjustly prejudice the accused’s rights Shiv Rametc. VS State of Uttar Pradesh - Crimes, State Of U. P. VS Shambhu Nath Singh - Supreme Court.
-
Impact of Advocate’s Fault - The fault of the advocate in failing to examine or cross-examine witnesses can lead to the closure of evidence and may influence the court to acquit the accused or order a retrial, highlighting the importance of proper legal representation Registrar General High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru VS Mallika @ Savithramam @ Jayamma @ Kala @ Shivamogamma W/o Hanumappa - Karnataka.
-
Court’s Discretion and Fair Trial - Courts are mandated to ensure a fair trial by summoning witnesses, allowing cross-examination, and avoiding procedural lapses. When delays or faults are not attributable to the accused, courts should facilitate the examination process to prevent miscarriage of justice Gauri Shanker VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan, Raj Deo Sharma VS State of Bihar - Crimes.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The legal principle established across these sources indicates that an accused’s right to examine witnesses, particularly through cross-examination, is fundamental. If this right is denied due to the fault of the advocate or court negligence, it can justify closing evidence or acquitting the accused. Courts are responsible for ensuring procedural fairness, and procedural lapses caused by the prosecution or advocates should not prejudice the accused’s rights. When delays or faults are not attributable to the accused, courts must take remedial steps, such as summoning witnesses again or providing opportunities for cross-examination, to uphold justice.
Search Results for "Accused Accused Could Not Examine the Witness Due to Fault of Advocate his Right can be Closed"
2001 2 Supreme 595 • India - Crimes
R.P.SETHI, K.T.THOMAS
but not examined for one reason or the other—On one occasion eye witness absented evidence was closed—Appeal against acquittal—Whether ... Another option is, when the accused is absent and the witness is present to be examined, the court can cancel his bail, if he is ... At any rate inconvenience of an advocate is not a “special reason” for bypassing the mandate of Section 309 of the Code. ... In spite of the fact that the #HL_STAR....
• India - Crimes
M.M.PUNCHHI, S.P.KURDUKAR
It was quite natural that no independent witness would come forward to assist the prosecution. ... not be bracketed with accused persons who have been awarded death sentence Award of life imprisonment to A6. ... The FIR came to be registered against 24 accused persons. ... This explanation given by the witness is quite plausible and the courts below were right in accepting his presence at the time of occurrence. ... He immediately closed and bolted the door of his roo....
2001 2 Supreme 595 • India - Supreme Court
R.P.SETHI, K.T.THOMAS
Another option is, when the accused is absent and the witness is present to be examined, the court can cancel his bail, if he is ... acquitted for want of evidence-Eye witnesses appeared but not examined for one reason or the other-On one occasion eye witness absented ... evidence was closed-Appeal against acquittal-Whether be allowed? ... In spite of the fact that the witness turned upon on those days he was not cross-exa....
2004 3 Supreme 210 • India - Supreme Court
DORAISWAMY RAJU, ARIJIT PASAYAT
It would not be right in acquitting an accused person solely on account of the defect; to do so would tantamount to playing into ... Whether the accused persons were really assailants or not could have been established by a fair and impartial investigation. ... As a protector of its citizens it has to ensure that during a trial in Court the witness could safely depose truth without any fear ... Section 311 of the Code does not confe....
2001 0 Supreme(Raj) 1831 • India - Rajasthan
H.R.PANWAR
Finding of the Court: The court found that the delay was not due to the fault of the prosecution and rejected the petitioner's ... its fault. ... the prosecution could invoke section 311 of the Cr.P.C. if necessary. ... be closed. ... It was also made clear that if evidence of any witness appears to the court to be essential to the just decision of the case, it is the duty of the court i.e. summon and examine or recall and re-examine#HL_E....
2017 0 Supreme(Kar) 895 • India - Karnataka
RAVI MALIMATH, JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
summoning that witness for cross-examination by defence - This would infringe legal right of accused and failure of justice - Judgment ... 302 & 392 - Conviction and imposition of death sentence - Entire case of prosecution resting on evidence of doctor - But Court not ... Since the Advocate for the accused was absent, the witness was bound over. Thereafter, nothing happened. The court did not summon the witness for Cross-examinatio....
1982 0 Supreme(Guj) 9 • India - Gujarat
S.B.MAJMUDAR, D.H.SHUKLA
... The accused was a seasoned person and not an immature youth. ... not reflect any remorse. ... The accused appeard to be suffering from self induced sense of injustice. ... After seeing another blow given by accused No. 2 and the knife blows this lady could not tolerate the sight and therefore she closed her eyes. ... Shantaben saw accused No. 1; and 2 each giving one blow of Dharia on her husband and then as she could#....
2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 415 • India - Rajasthan
ARUN MONGA
when the failure to do so was not the fault of the accused. ... the implications of denying the petitioner the right to cross-examine a crucial witness. ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the right to cross-examine a material witness is fundamental to a fair ... Ghanshyam Soni (PW/15), but when it came to the right of the petitioner to cross-examine the said witness, the s....
2010 0 Supreme(P&H) 2858 • India - Punjab and Haryana
A.N.JINDAL
Trial Court to provide two fair opportunities to the accused to cross-examine the witnesses, who could not be cross-examined. ... --If the counsel had not turned up, Court could provide an opportunity to accused to engage another counsel--PW was also examined ... be expedient and in the interest of justice to provide the accused - appellant opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses in order ... s....
• India - Crimes
M.SRINIVASAN, M.B.SHAH, K.T.THOMAS
duty of the Court to summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person. ... If the delay is not due to any fault of the prosecution, it is open to the prosecution to place the relevant facts before the Court ... We make it clear that if evidence of any witness appears to the Court to be essential to the just decision of the case it is the ... We make it clear that if evidence of any witness appears to the Court to be essential to the just decision of the cas....
Filter by Legal Phrase
