The Allahabad High Court has sought an explanation from a Trial Judge in Aligarh for summoning an accused under a non-existent provision of the SC/ST Act, highlighting a potential violation of the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, pointing casual exercise of judicial power.
The Madras High Court observed that the trial court “committed a grave error without understanding the fundamental principle of criminal law” while convicting the appellant. The Court set aside the conviction and directed the trial judge to undergo judicial training.
Delhi High Court imposed Rs.50,000 costs on litigants for fabricating a false bias claim against a trial judge, terming it a “figment of infertile imagination,” while stressing that misleading assertions cannot be allowed to derail judicial proceedings.
The Supreme Court of India highlighted the need for active participation of courts in trials, especially when public prosecutors neglect their duties. The court stressed the importance of thorough cross-examinations by public prosecutors to uncover the truth. Emphasizing the duty of courts to ascertain truth, it criticized prosecutorial and judicial failures.
