High court judges often convict innocent suspects to save their career prospects and avoid the wrath of higher courts: Allahabad HC

At the same time, the division bench regretted that the government did not accept the government’s recommendations Commission for Law in his 277th report (about ‘Wrongful prosecution (miscarriage of justice): legal remedies’) because there are many cases where the accused charged for heinous crimes are not acquitted despite clear cases of acquittal.

The Court added that the government has yet to implement the recommendations of the 277^e According to the Law Commission report, the violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India for wrongly prosecuted and punished persons would continue unabated.

The Court also said that in the much hyped Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023there is nothing for such unfortunates in accordance with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

For context: the 277^e report of the Law Commission (2018) recommended introduction of a specific legal provision for the redress of cases of wrongful persecution – to provide relief to the victims of wrongful persecution in terms of monetary and non-monetary compensation (such as counseling, mental health care, vocational/employment skills development, etc. .) within a legal framework. The Commission has also proposed a legal obligation for the state to compensate the victims of wrongful prosecution, with the right to compensation from the erring officials.

In its judgment acquitting an accused of murder, the Court expressed disappointment that a false accusation and the resulting trauma are beyond the ability of a court to financially compensate.

“A virtual death occurs in the personality of the individual charged in the trial, making it impossible for him to return to ordinary life with an order of acquittal. The lost years of free living cannot be returned to him or re-enacted to please him. He and his family suffer for the cause of criminal justice. Money for victims plays little role in cleansing the sovereign of this unpardonable sin…The family of such persons also go through the time-consuming and money-consuming process of challenging the trial, which is so tedious that it is itself no less than a severe punishment. Sometimes the family loses all its means of survival in defending its loved ones in courts at other levels,the Court noted.

The Court noted that if the suspects are ultimately acquitted, they will feel unfit in their families and in society. Their place in the family is taken by other family members, the other family members usurp the property and are rarely seen as welcome members after being in prison for a long time.

In this context, the Court suggested that the State could offer the suspects monetary compensation, which could provide them with some comfort. After being acquitted of the baseless accusations leveled against them, they would no longer be seen as a burden to their family.

The Court made these observations while allowing an appeal against a murder accused who challenged his conviction in the case.

In its 27-page judgment, the Court noted that the accused-appellant was not allowed to defend himself against the charge for which he was convicted, and that the trial changed the charge even after the statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Article 313 CrPC, which was not appropriate.

The Court also took into account that none of the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution’s case. Despite this, the suspect was convicted by the court and served approximately 13 years in prison before being released on bail in October 2022.

Considering the plight of such innocent persons, who are wrongfully prosecuted but later acquitted after years, the Court said that our justice system takes little effort to make amends.

“It is true that this issue has sometimes been addressed through positive overtures in constitutional jurisdictions. But still no concrete judicial mechanism for a uniform application in cases of unlawful prosecution has been established in our case law to achieve any compensation.”, the Court further said.

The Court also emphasized that private law remedies against wrongful prosecution are not effective remedies for victims of wrongful prosecution, given the slow pace of civil litigation and the associated costs, such as court costs and other legal costs.

The Court further held that any possible act contributing to an unlawful prosecution can be dealt with criminally to secure the conviction of erring state officials and private complainants, as well as to initiate malicious prosecutions.

In this context, the Court refers to the ‘culpable conduct’ in the judgment Chapters IX and XI of the IPC as useful indicators before constitutional courts and other civil courts to decide how an unlawful prosecution takes place, especially in the context of deviation from the direction of the laws relating to investigation, investigation, and trial.

The division bench also underlined that instead of setting up special courts to hear the claims for damages as suggested by the Law Commission, pragmatism and convenience require that the task be performed by the court acquitting the accused, whether a trial, appeal or review. court.

The Court suggested that, like the provision for compensation to crime victims (Articles 357 and 357 A Code of Criminal Procedure/or corresponding Articles 395 BNSS and 396 BNSS), an enabling clause could be granted to the court acquitting the suspect to decide about claims for compensation in a concise and quick manner.

AppearanceS

Appellant’s lawyer: Amar Singh Kashya, Ajay Sengar, SP Lal

Defendant’s lawyer: AGA I Manju Thakur

Case title – Upendra @ Balveer vs. State of U.P

Case quote:

Click here to read/download the order