At the same time, the division bench lamented that the Government did not accept the recommendations made by Law Commission in it 277th report (on “Wrongful legal action (judicial infringement): remedies”) as there are many cases where accused in heinous crimes are not acquitted despite clear cases of acquittal.

The court added that since the government has yet to implement the recommendations of the 277^th Law Commission Report, Violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India to prosecute and wrongfully punished will continue unabated.

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

For context, 277^th report of the Law Commission (2018) recommended the adoption of a specific legal provision to remedy cases of abusive criminal prosecution – to provide relief to victims of abusive criminal prosecution in terms of monetary and non-monetary compensation (such as counselling, mental health services, vocational / employment skills development, etc. . ) in a statutory framework. The commission also proposed a statutory state obligation to compensate victims of abusive prosecution with the right to be compensated by erring officers.

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

“A virtual death takes place on the personality of the individual accused in the trial, making it impossible for him to return to ordinary life with an acquittal. The lost years of free life cannot be given back or re-enacted to please. He and his family suffer for the cause of the administration of criminal justice. Loss money plays little part in clearing the sovereign of this unforgivable sin…The family of such persons also go through the time- and money-consuming process of contesting the trial, which is so tedious that it is itself no less than a major punishment. Sometimes the family loses all means of survival to defend their near and dear one in courts at various levels,” the Court observed.

The court noted that if the accused are eventually acquitted, they find themselves unfit in their family and society. Their place in the family is occupied by other family members, the other family members usurp the property and are rarely seen as welcome members after being incarcerated for a long time in prison.

In this regard, the Court suggested that the State could award monetary compensation to the accused, which may provide them some solace. Having been acquitted of the baseless charges brought against them, they will not be seen as a burden to their family.

The court made these observations while allowing the appeal of a criminal accused challenging his conviction in the case.

In the 27-page judgment, the Court observed that the accused-appellant was not allowed to defend himself against the charge for which he was convicted and the trial amended the charge even after recording the statement of the accused-appellants under Section 313 CrPC, which was not appropriate

The court also considered that none of the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution’s case at all. Despite this, the accused was convicted by the trial court and had to spend around 13 years in prison before being released on bail in October 2022.

Given the plight of such innocent people who are wrongfully prosecuted but later acquitted years later, the Court said our justice system does little to make amends.

“It is true that at times, positive openings in constitutional jurisdictions have addressed this issue. But still at present, in our jurisprudence, no concrete judicial mechanism that has a uniform application in cases of abusive criminal prosecution to make some reparations.“, the Court also observed.

The Court also emphasized that private law Remedies for the tort of malicious prosecution are not effective remedies for victims of abusive prosecution, given the slow pace of civil litigation and expenses such as court fees and other costs of litigation, involved.

In addition, the Court held that any possible act contributing to an abusive prosecution can be dealt with criminally to ensure the conviction of erring public officials and private plaintiffs, also launching malicious prosecutions.

In this regard, the Court referred to the “culpable conduct” of Chapters IX and XI of the IPC as indicators at hand for the constitutional courts and other civil courts to decide how a wrongful prosecution takes place, especially in the context of deviation from the direction of laws relating to investigation, investigation, and judgment.

The Division Bench also pointed out that instead of creating special courts to deal with the relief claims presented by the Law Commission, pragmatism and convenience demand that the task be discharged by the court to acquit the accused, whether of a trial, appeal or review. court.

The Court suggested that, like the provision for compensation to victims of crime (sections 357 and 357 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure/or the corresponding articles 395 BNSS and 396 BNSS), a power clause can be conferred on the acquitting court to decide on claims in a quick and concise manner.

appearanceS

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

Defendant’s lawyer: AGM I Manju Thakur

Case Title – Upendra @ Balveer Vs. State of UP

Case Citation:

Click here to read/download the order