Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

07 May 2024 2:49 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