Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     Smell of Alcohol in Post-Mortem Insufficient to Establish Intoxication: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Liability of Insurance Company in Motor Accident Case    |     No Grounds for Transfer: Free Bus Fare for Women in Telangana Reduces Travel Burden: Telangana High Court Rejects Wife's Petition to Transfer Divorce Case    |     Mechanical Referrals Invalid: "Deputy Registrar Must Apply Judicial Mind: Allahabad HC Quashes Deputy Registrar's Order in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Election Dispute    |    

Loss of Trial Court Records: High Court of Delhi Sets Aside Conviction U/S 304 part-II IPC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, the High Court of Delhi, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikas Mahajan, has set aside the convictions of appellants in the cases of CRL.A. 741/2003 and CRL.A. 719/2003. The judgment, delivered on January 3, 2024, underscores the crucial importance of complete Trial Court Records (TCR) in upholding the principles of a fair trial and justice.

The appellants, initially convicted under Section 304 part-II IPC read with Section 34 IPC, challenged the trial court’s decision, which was primarily based on the preponderance of probabilities and involved witnesses who had turned hostile.

Justice Vikas Mahajan, in his ruling, stated, "In order to affirm the conviction of the appellant, the perusal of the Trial Court Record is the essential element of hearing of the appeal. Every appellant has a right to satisfy the Appellate Court that the material evidence available on record did not justify his conviction and this is a valuable right which cannot be denied to an appellant." This observation highlights the court's commitment to ensuring that the rights of the appellants are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The judgment took into account the non-reconstruction of the TCR, which was deemed essential for a fair appellate review. The High Court referred to previous Supreme Court decisions, notably ‘State of UP vs. Abhay Raj Singh & Anr.’ and ‘Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India’, to reinforce the principle that the absence of complete trial records violates the right to a fair trial.

Date of Decision: January 03, 2024

RAMESH & ANR. VS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI 

 

Similar News