The Madras High Court recently said that the effort to speed up the trial of criminal cases should be appreciated, but it should be kept in mind that it should not be at the cost of discouraging the defense from presenting their case.
A bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira said, “…hasty justice is not the preferred alternative to delayed justice…Considering the need to eliminate delay in disposal of criminal cases, appropriate precautions should be taken to prevent undue speed or haste. Is required.” matter of settlement, as it would result in unfair play.”
The Court emphasized that the right to a speedy trial is generally claimed by the party facing legal proceedings, seeking speedy resolution of the case, with protections guaranteed by law. However, if the same party seeks an adjournment of the trial, it may be seen as a strategy to regain the personal liberty enjoyed pending the trial.
“Therefore, a balanced approach needs to be adopted after careful analysis between the scope for speedy trial and the intention of the party seeking adjournment,” the bench said.
These comments were made in the petition for case transfer. The petitioner, who was accused of offenses punishable under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 13(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), filed his case Demanded to be transferred. Court of Additional District Sessions Judge, Court of Principal Special Judge for Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) cases, Chennai to some other competent special court for CBI cases in Chennai.
The petitioner alleged that on the ground of ill health, he requested for adjournment before the present Trial Court, as he could not proceed with the case due to his ill health, however, the hearing proceeded without giving him a fair opportunity for cross-examination. Was increased. Witness.
Even thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before the trial court, seeking adjournment of the case for two months, but this was also rejected by the trial court. The trial court said that the petition was filed only to delay the trial.
The aggrieved petitioner moved the High Court seeking transfer of the case to some other court.
Counsel for the petitioner apprised the High Court that he has been diagnosed with a serious illness and is undergoing chemotherapy and surgery, as is evident from the medical records produced.
He argued that in the proper perspective the petitioner had sought reasonable time to defend his case, however, the trial court has misinterpreted it as a delay tactic.
He submitted that the petitioner now fears that he may not face a fair trial and thus, in the interest of justice, the case should be transferred to some other competent special court for CBI cases in Chennai.
The single judge bench referred to Section 309 of the CrPC, which empowers the court to adjourn or adjourn proceedings.
It said, “There is no doubt that the above legal provision prohibits unnecessary adjournment of the case, however, it does not completely ban such action. Reading between the lines it will become clear that adjournment of the case can be done by recording the reasons/circumstances thereof, which can be done if found beyond the control of the party seeking such adjournment.
The court said that in the present case, the petitioner had sought such adjournment on medical grounds and when the trial judge rejected the same, the petitioner feared that his interest would be at risk if the trial was proceeded with in the first place. There may be adverse effects. Justice of the Peace.
The HC said the judicial officer’s comments show that he was guided by the sole intention of conducting a speedy trial without any prejudice and was slightly ignoring the genuineness of the petitioner’s plea for adjournment of the trial.
Therefore, keeping in mind the balance of convenience, the High Court justified withdrawal and transfer of the petitioner’s case in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the Court ordered withdrawal of the petitioner’s case from the present Trial Court and transferred the case to the Court of XIV Additional Judge (Special Court for CBI Cases), Chennai.
Follow us on Google news ,Twitter , and Join Whatsapp Group of thelocalreport.in
