Supreme Court: While deciding the instant case where the Trial Court disposed off the case hurriedly within the time period of 9 days, the Court observed that the courts have to perform their duties effectively keeping in mind the spirit, dignity and authority of the judicial institution and should actively participate in the proceedings so as to proceed to the truth.
In the instant case the appellant was convicted under Section 498A and 306 of IPC by the Session’s Judge, Mehsana who framed the charges and disposed off the case without properly appreciating the evidence. The appellant counsel Nikhil Goel argued that the High Court was anguished by the fact that the prosecution had dropped several witnesses and the Trial Court completed the evaluation of witnesses and evidences within one day, therefore the High Court without remanding the matter back to the Trial Court, upturned the acquittal based on the dying declaration of the victim. The counsel for the respondent however contended that the prosecution case was proved satisfactorily with the aid of the dying declaration.
Perusing the arguments furthered by the counsels, the Court chose to comment upon the hurriedly conducted trial by the session’s Judge. The Court observed that in the instant case the Session’s Court has failed to perform its duties to reach the truth and convict the accused. The Court also condemned the prosecutors for acting more like counsels for the defence therefore becoming a liability on a fair judicial system. The Court further observed that in the instant case where the prosecuting agency itself was in coalition with the accused, the trial Court should have taken a greater responsibility in rendering justice rather than making a mockery of it by disposing the case within nine days. Patel Maheshbhai Ranchodbhai v. State of
To read the full judgment, refer SCCOnLine