Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

"Justice has nothing to do with what goes on in the courtroom; Justice is what comes out of a courtroom," Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India set aside the High Court's verdict convicting Munna Pandey in a rape and murder case involving a 10-year-old girl. The bench consisting of Hon'ble Justices B.R. Gavai, J.B. Pardiwala, and Prashant Kumar Mishra raised serious concerns about the "serious lapses in the investigation" and the "inadequate 313 examination of the accused."

In their observation, the Court emphasized, "justice is not merely about courtroom proceedings but about the outcome that ensures truth and fairness," thereby remitting the case for a fresh trial.

The Court scrutinized the glaring shortcomings in the investigation, such as the failure to obtain a Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report, lack of medical examinations of the accused, and absence of DNA profiling evidence, which were vital in a case of such severe nature.

Besides, the Court stressed the role of a judge in a fair trial, stating that judges "are not mere spectators or recording machines but play an active role in questioning witnesses, seeking relevant information, and upholding the pursuit of truth and justice."

The bench also criticized the High Court's approach in making assumptions regarding the appellant being the sole perpetrator, neglecting the presence of a co-accused and other significant evidence.

Notably, the Court laid great emphasis on the concept of a fair trial, stating it to be "deeply rooted in history, enshrined in the Constitution, and embodied in criminal trial statutes." It underlined the importance of "impartiality and fairness of all parties involved," especially in cases involving capital punishment.

The apex court urged the High Court to expedite the case, considering the appellant's long incarceration, and even suggested appointing legal representation for the appellant if necessary.

This ruling has drawn attention to the critical aspects of criminal procedure, the necessity for a meticulous investigation, and the indispensable role of the judiciary in upholding justice and fairness.

Date of Decision: 04 September 2023

MUNNA PANDEY  vs STATE OF BIHAR          

Latest Legal News