Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

“Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Judgment for ‘Violating the Principle of Fair Representation and Justice’”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, August 30, 2023 – In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has set aside a High Court judgment relating to a murder case, asserting that the appellant, Niranjan Das, was not given fair legal representation.

The bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal highlighted the procedural flaws in the High Court’s handling of the case. “It was a duty of the Court to give a reasonable time to the advocate appointed to go through the file and get ready to assist the Court,” observed Justice Oka.

Niranjan Das was convicted for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Trial Court. His appeal was quickly dismissed by the High Court, which appointed an advocate for him on the same day as the hearing. The apex court criticized this hasty process, stating that it “violated the principle of fair representation and justice.”

Justice Oka pointed out that the advocate appointed for Das made arguments regarding ‘common intention’ to commit murder, even though the appellant was not convicted under Section 34 for common intention. “The very fact that such submission is made shows that the advocate was not ready with the matter,” noted Justice Oka.

Niranjan Das, who has been incarcerated for over eight years, has now been directed to be enlarged on bail. The case has been remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.

The judgment concluded by emphasizing the importance of legal representation, and ensuring that the accused are given a fair chance in the judicial process. “We set aside the impugned judgment...and remand the said appeal to the High Court for fresh consideration,” the bench declared.

While the Supreme Court’s decision has been lauded for upholding the principles of justice and fair representation, it has also sparked discussions on the urgent need for reform in legal procedures to ensure that such lapses do not occur in the future.

This case will now proceed for a re-hearing in the High Court, with both parties given adequate time for preparation and representation.

Date of Decision:  August 29, 2023

NIRANJAN DAS @ NIRU DAS @ MAHANTO vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Latest Legal News