The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court criticized the inadequate compliance with Section 309 of the CrPC during criminal trials, particularly concerning rape cases. Highlighting delays, the court mandated day-to-day trials and strict adherence to procedural guidelines to ensure timely justice. This emphasizes the urgent need for accountability within the judicial system for both survivors and accused.
Mumbai: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has highlighted the “alarming state of affairs” in criminal trials, particularly in cases involving non-compliance with Section 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which mandates day-to-day trials. While ordering a retrial in a rape case, the court emphasised the importance of ensuring timely justice and protecting the dignity of womanhood.
Rape: A Crime Against Womanhood and Society
In its recent ruling, the court reminded the legal system that “rape is a crime not only against the survivor but also against womanhood.” To ensure timely justice, the court issued guidelines to lower courts to strictly comply with:
- Section 309 of the CrPC: Mandates trials to be conducted day-to-day without unnecessary adjournments.
- Section 346 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita: Requires trials to be completed within two months of filing the chargesheet.
The High Court also instructed its registry to monitor compliance with these provisions and ensure adherence.
Justice for All: Speedy Trial Rights
Justice Govinda Sanap, who reviewed over 60 appeals, expressed deep concern over repeated lapses in trial procedures. He noted,
“The mandate of Section 309 has not been complied with even in a single trial. The mandate has been thrown to the wind, and evidence recorded in a piecemeal manner. Such recordings after adjournments can cause prejudice to parties.”
Justice Sanap added,
“It is not a healthy practice followed by courts. This must be attended to on a priority basis. Otherwise, the faith of the common man in this august institution would get further eroded.”
Case Background: Delay in Justice
The case in question involved two rape accused from Madhya Pradesh’s Baitul district, who were convicted by an additional sessions judge in Amravati’s Achalpur on August 26, 2021, with a sentence of five years of rigorous imprisonment. The crime dates back to April 5, 2016, and the accused were arrested the following day.
However, the High Court overturned the conviction, citing procedural delays.
“The accused were arrested on April 6, 2016. Both survivor and accused have a fundamental right to a speedy trial. The crime of rape is not only against the victim but also against womanhood,”
Justice Sanap said. He criticised the delay of 2 years and 4 months in recording evidence from 10 witnesses, which he deemed unreasonable.
Guidelines Issued by the Court
To address such delays and lapses, the Bombay HC directed:
- Strict adherence to Section 309 CrPC and Section 346 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Appointment of competent prosecutors to represent the state effectively.
- Provision of state-funded defence lawyers for the accused, if necessary.
Additionally, the court registry was instructed to monitor compliance with these measures to avoid future delays in trials.
Importance of Compliance
This judgment underscores the need for speedy and efficient trials to protect the rights of both the survivor and the accused. “Both survivor and accused have a fundamental right to a speedy trial,” Justice Sanap emphasised. The court’s ruling serves as a strong reminder to the judiciary to uphold its responsibility of ensuring justice without unnecessary delays.
By streamlining trial procedures and adhering to the legal mandates, courts can restore the faith of the common man in the judicial system. This case also highlights the critical need for proper trial management and accountability at every level of the judiciary.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
