AKHIL SABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Cr.P.C.' hereinafter), and the prayers herein are as under:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, Criminal Rules of Practice in Kerala, 1982 (for short, 'the Rules, 1982' hereinafter) got amended and Rule 19(4) incorporated w.e.f. 19/5/2022. Therefore, compliance of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, is mandatory, before start of trial. However, in the case at hand, though the case stands posted for trial on 22/6/2024, Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, not complied. Therefore, the right of the accused to fairly defend the case has been taken away and in such view of the matter, non-compliance of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, would require interference with direction to the trial court to ensure compliance of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Manoj & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 510] holding that, in the interests of fairness, the prosecution should as a matter of rule, in all criminal trials, comply with Rule 4 of Draft Rules of Criminal Practice, 2021, and furnish the list of statements, documents, material objects and exhibits which are not relied upon by the investigating officer. The presiding officers of courts in criminal trials shall ensure compliance with such rules.