Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

"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