M.KANNAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Every person has a right to a fair trial by a competent Court is the spirit of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution of India "Denial of fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as it is to the to the victim and the society". The Honourable Supreme Court in Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr Vs. State Of Gujarat & Ors reported in 2006 3 SCC 374 has explained the concept of fair trail and said that it is central to the administration of justice and the cardinal principal of protection of human rights. In the instant case, the principal ground raised by the appellant is that there was denial of fair trail to him before the trial Court. Let us go into the circumstances under which such a plea is raised by the accused / appellant.

(2.) The appellant, hardly aged 23 years of age, is alleged to have kidnapped a young girl aged 16 years on 04.03.2015, had repeated sexual intercourse with her till 06.03.2015, which resulted in her pregnancy and at last administered drugs to the victim and caused miscarriage of the foetus on 03.07.2015. On these allegations, the respondent prosecuted him for offences under Sec. 366 I.P.C., Sec. 312 I.P.C. and Sec. 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 201

(3.) The trial Court, took cognizance of the offence on 19.11.2015 and posted the case for further proceedings on 012.2015. The accused appeared before the trial Court on 012.2015, upon whom, copies of the documents were served as required under Sec. 207 Cr.P.C. The accused sought for time to engage a counsel. On 08.12.2015 when the case came up for hearing, one "Mr. S" an Advocate of 17 years of standing in the Bar, filed memo of appearance for the accused. For hearing the parties on farming of charges, the case was adjourned to 15.12.2015. On that date, the learned Public Prosecutor opened up the case as required under Sec. 226 Crimial P.C. and the learned counsel Mr. S also made his submissions. The trial Court, thereafter, on 22.12.2015, framed charges against the accused under Sec. 366 I.P.C., Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act and Sec. 312 I.P.C. The accused pleaded not guilty. The trial Court ordered issuance of summons for the appearance of the prosecution witnesses on 25.01.2016.