The Supreme Court has directed all trial courts to adopt standardized formats with tabulated charts of witnesses, documents, and material objects in criminal judgments, aiming to enhance clarity, transparency, and accuracy in evidence appreciation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a landmark judgment toward streamlining criminal trials, the Supreme Court of India has directed all trial courts across the country to adopt a standardized format for judgments. The new guidelines require courts to include tabulated charts of witnesses, documents, and material objects, enhancing clarity, traceability, and transparency in judicial proceedings.
The directions were issued by a Division Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta while acquitting Manoj Jethabhai Parmar, who had spent nearly 13 years in custody in a rape case, citing a “hopelessly botched” investigation and “investigative apathy.”
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Mandates Clear Charts in Criminal Judgments to Speed Up Trials
The Supreme Court emphasized that structured judgments facilitate better comprehension for trial courts, appellate courts, and stakeholders. The new format mandates three types of charts:
- Witness Chart: Lists all witnesses along with their roles, such as informant, eyewitness, investigating officer, or medical expert.
- Document Chart: Records all exhibited documents, the witness who proved them, and their description (FIR, Panchnama, FSL report, etc.).
- Material Objects Chart: Details all physical evidence, its description, and the witness confirming its relevance.
These charts aim to prevent ambiguity, ensure proper evaluation of evidence, and maintain traceability of key trial materials. The guidelines also apply to defense evidence and can be adapted for civil cases involving voluminous evidence.
While issuing the procedural directions, the Supreme Court set aside the conviction of Manoj Parmar, originally sentenced to life imprisonment in 2013 for the alleged rape of a four-year-old girl. The Court called the case a “grave and distressing” example of procedural lapses and investigative negligence.
Observations by the Supreme Court
- Contradictions in FIR and Witness Statements: The Court noted that crucial details were omitted in the FIR, undermining the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
- Questionable Witness Conduct: The alleged eyewitnesses displayed “gross insensitivity,” raising doubts about their reliability.
- Flawed Evidence Recovery: Blood-stained clothing recovered from the accused’s home lacked credible proof of ownership or proper seizure.
- Neglect of Scientific Methods: No DNA profiling or forensic verification was conducted, reflecting investigative apathy.
The Court concluded that the trial had been conducted with pedantic rigidity, which obscured the truth and ultimately led to a miscarriage of justice.
Background of the Case
The prosecution alleged that on June 13, 2013, four boys had seen the appellant pushing the child out of his house. However, the FIR was lodged against “unknown persons”, despite eyewitness claims implicating the appellant and the boys.
The Supreme Court’s directions mark a major reform in criminal procedure, promoting:
- Transparency and accountability in trial proceedings.
- Simplified and standardized judgments for appellate review.
- Prevention of wrongful convictions due to poorly documented evidence.
By mandating these structured charts, the Supreme Court is setting a new benchmark for evidence management and judicial clarity in India’s criminal courts.
Case Title:
Manojbhai Jethabhai Parmar (Rohit) v. State of Gujarat
Criminal Appeal No(s). 2973 of 2023
READ JUDGMENT
Click Here to Read More Reports On Criminal Judgments