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

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Exemption from Personal Appearance, Emphasizes Accused's Rights and Convenience

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently granted exemption from personal appearance to the accused in a criminal case while emphasizing the importance of safeguarding the accused's rights and convenience. The decision was rendered by Hon'ble Justice Harpreet Singh Brar on 22nd May 2023.

The judgment highlighted that personal appearance of the accused should be dispensed with when it causes hardship or inconvenience, especially in cases where trial delays have resulted in unjustified suffering. Justice Brar stated, "The failure of the prosecution to produce its witnesses and conclude the trial in almost five years has put the petitioners through unjustified suffering and inconvenience."

The court established parameters for granting exemption, such as being a woman, elderly, disabled, facing economic or physical hardship, or required to travel long distances. These instances were considered illustrative, with the court emphasizing that each case should be assessed based on its unique circumstances. Justice Brar further remarked, "The trial Court should be generous in exempting the accused from appearing in person... If no useful purpose would be served in insisting upon the personal appearance... the personal appearance of the accused shall not be insisted upon."

The judgment cited relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, including Sections 205 and 317, which empower the court to dispense with personal appearance and proceed with trial in the absence of the accused. The court clarified that exemption from personal appearance does not affect the presumption of innocence, stating, "Every accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty... The presumption of innocence is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

While the court declined the petitioners' request to quash the FIR and charges, it exempted their personal appearance before the trial court, subject to certain conditions. The court held that the trial court should exercise its powers under Sections 205 and 317 generously and liberally, considering the progress of the trial and the inconvenience caused to the accused.

This judgment reiterates the importance of balancing the interests of justice with the rights and convenience of the accused. By granting exemption from personal appearance, the court aims to expedite trial proceedings and reduce unnecessary hardships faced by the accused.

Date of Decision: 22nd May 2023

Suresh Kumar and another vs The State of Haryana and another

Latest Legal News