LOADING

Type to search

Criminal justice system can’t be unidirectional exercising, veered completely to the offender’s gain: SC

Criminal justice system can’t be unidirectional exercising, veered completely to the offender’s gain: SC

Share

Criminal justice gadgets cannot be unidirectional exercising, veered exclusively to the offender’s advantage: SC.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday stated that the criminal justice transport gadget could not be allowed to veer entirely to the advantage of the wrongdoer, thereby making it a unidirectional exercise and proper direction of balancing the rights of the accused and that of the prosecution.

“Individual rights of accused are undoubtedly important. But similarly important is societal interest for bringing the wrongdoer to e-book and for the machine to ship proper message to all in the society — be it the regulation abiding citizen or the capability offender,” Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Navin Sinha, and Justice K.M. Joseph stated in a judgment.

Speaking for the bench, Justice Sinha stated: “Human rights aren’t only of the accused. However, quantity aside, also of the sufferer, the symbolic member of the society as the capacity victim and the society as a whole.”

Law has to cater to the great situations that appear in society. The law is dynamic; the rules’ knowledge seems inflexible in instances when a situation (set of information) is not carried out explicitly. Expediency then dictates that the higher judiciary, while deciphering the regulation, considers such exception(s) as is known as for without worrying the pith and substance and the unique goal of the legislature,” the judgment stated, reminding the better judiciary of its obligation in deciphering the Law.

This is needed “in most cases” for the cause to “strike a balance between competing forces — justice being the stop — and also because the process of fresh law may want to take a long term, which might mean a failure of Justice and with its erosion of public confidence and the trust inside the justice transport system.”

The court docket also stated that proper management of crook justice gadgets calls for balancing the rights of the accused and that of the prosecution. “We, therefore, maintain that each pending criminal prosecution, trial, and appeal shall continue to be governed through the personal facts of the case,” the court stated.

The court said this at the same time as brushing off an appeal by way of one Varinder Kumar, a resident of Himachal Pradesh, assailing the order reversing his acquittal and convicting him under Section 20(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act B and sentencing him to 20 years in prison.

Kumar was apprehended on March 31, 1995, for carrying ‘charas’ in gunny luggage with various portions. He becomes acquitted via the trial court docket on the grounds of non-compliance with Section one hundred(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding independent witnesses. However, it was reversed via the High Court.

Elizabeth Coleman

I am a lawyer by profession and a blogger by passion. I started blogging to express my views on various issues.The blog has now become one of my passions. After seeing so many of my friends and colleagues using blogs for their business purposes, I decided to share my views through my blog.I love reading other people's blogs. I am trying to write one every day, and sometimes when I have time I write two or three posts per day.

    1