Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

"High Court Advocates for Fair Trial Scheduling: 'Lawyer's Convenience Must Be Considered'

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that underscores the importance of considering the convenience of lawyers while scheduling trials, the High Court of Kerala, led by the Honorable Mr. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, has set a precedent for a more balanced approach in the judicial process.

The judgment, delivered on November 3, 2023, in the case of CRL.MC NO. 9209 of 2023, involved the rescheduling of a murder trial initially dismissed by the Additional Sessions Court, Palakkad. The High Court's intervention was sought after the lower court's decision, which was influenced by a High Court directive for the swift disposal of murder cases.

Justice Kunhikrishnan, in his ruling, emphasized, "These are fundamental things to be considered by the trial court at the time when the case is posted for trial." He highlighted that while the expeditious disposal of cases is essential, it should not overshadow the fundamental rights of the accused, including the right to choose their legal representation.

The judgment further noted that "Accused has got a right to choose his lawyer for conducting the trial and hence the convenience of the lawyer also should be taken care of by the Court." This observation is pivotal in ensuring that the scheduling of trials is not just a unilateral decision but a process that respects the needs of all parties involved, including the legal representatives.

Advocate V.A. Johnson, representing the petitioners, welcomed the judgment, stating that it reinforces the principle of fairness in the legal process. The Public Prosecutor, Smt Sreeja V, also acknowledged the judgment's significance in balancing the need for timely justice with the practicalities of legal representation.

The High Court's directive to the Additional Sessions Court-II, Palakkad, to reconsider the application for rescheduling the trial in light of this judgment, marks a crucial step in ensuring a judicious balance between the expeditious disposal of cases and the rights of the accused to fair representation.

This landmark decision is expected to influence future cases where trial scheduling conflicts with the availability of legal counsel, ensuring a fairer and more equitable justice system.

 Date of Decision- 3rd November 2023

VISHNU VS STATE OF KERALA

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Kerl-03-Nov-23-Vishnu-Vs-State1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News