ANOKHILAL versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1196 · Decided: 18-12-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT, INDU MALHOTRA, KRISHNA MURARI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · cites 8 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1196
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 18 S.C.R.
ANOKHILAL
v.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
(Criminal Appeal Nos.62–63 of 2014)
DECEMBER 18, 2019
[UDAY UMESH LALIT, INDU MALHOTRA AND
KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Legal Services: Grant of free legal aid – Real and meaningful
assistance – Entitlement to – On facts, in the case of rape and murder
of a minor girl, appointment of counsel through legal services to
represent the accused-appellant – The day the counsel appointed,
on the same day charges framed against the appellant for offence
punishable u/ss. 363, 366, 377, 376(2)(f) and 302 IPC r/w s. 6 of
POCSO Act – Thereafter, conviction of appellant and imposition of
death sentence and other sentences by courts below – On appeal,
held: The day Amicus Curiae was named, on the same date, the counsel
was called upon to defend the accused at the stage of framing of
charges – Amicus Curiae did not have sufficient time to go through
even the basic documents, nor the advantage of any discussion or
interaction with the accused, and time to reflect over the matter –
Even before the Amicus Curiae could come to grips of the matter,
the charges were framed and trial itself was concluded within a
fortnight – Approach adopted by the trial court, may have expedited
the conduct of trial, but did not further the cause of justice – It left
glaring gaps – Thus, in the process, the assistance that the appellant
was entitled to in the form of legal aid, could not be real and
meaningful – Counsel ought to have been afforded sufficient
opportunity to study the matter and the infraction in that behalf
resulted in miscarriage of justice – Judgment of conviction and
orders of sentence passed by courts below against the appellant set
aside directing de novo consideration wherein the counsel would
take up the remaining issue – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 363, 366,
377, 376(2)(f) and 302 – Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 – s. 6.
Advocates/Lawyer: Appointment as Amicus Curiae –
Guidelines for, in cases where there is a possibility of life sentence
[2019] 18 S.C.R. 1196
1196
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1197
or death sentence – Held: Advocates having put in minimum of 10
years practice at the Bar alone be considered to be appointed as
Amicus Curiae or through legal services to represent an accused –
In all matters dealt with by the High Court concerning confirmation
of death sentence, Senior Advocates of the Court must first be
considered to be appointed as Amicus Curiae – Counsel appointed
as Amicus Curiae, to be provided some reasonable time to prepare
the matter – Minimum seven days’ time may normally be considered
to be appropriate and adequate.
Criminal Trial – Expeditious disposal – Necessity of – Held:
Expeditious disposal is required in criminal matters and that would
naturally be part of guarantee of fair trial – However, the attempt
to expedite the process should not be at the expense of the basic
elements of fairness and the opportunity to the accused – The cause
of justice must never be allowed to suffer or be sacrificed which is
paramount – Thus, the process may be expedited, but fast tracking
of process must never ever result in burying the cause of justice –
Administration of criminal justice.
Constitution of India: Art. 39A – Equal justice and free legal
aid – Held: Article 39-A provides for free legal aid to ensure that
opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by
reason of economic or other disabilities – Right to Free Legal
Services is an essential ingredient of ‘reasonable, fair and just’
procedure for a person accused of an offence – Trial must be
conducted in such a manner as will punish the innocent and punish
the guilty – Counsel must be given sufficient and adequate time to
prepare for the defence – Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
Disposing of the appeals with direction to list the matter
on 18.02.2020 for consideration of other related issues, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Article 39-A inserted by the 42nd amendment to
the Constitution, effected in the year 1977, provides for free legal
aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied
to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities. The
statutory regime put in place including the enactment of the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987 is designed to achieve the mandate
of Article 39-A. It has been well accepted that Right to Free Legal
Services is an essential ingredient of ‘reasonable, fair and just’
ANOKHILAL v. STATE OF MAD

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.