STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. PANNA AHAMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Fair trial is the main object of criminal procedure and it is the duty of every court to ensure that such fairness is neither hampered nor threatened. It entails interest of the accused, the victim and the society, and as has been held by the Apex Court in Natasha Singh v. CBI, (2013) 5 SCC 741 (2 Judge Bench) it includes grant of fair and proper opportunities to all concerned, for fair trial is not only a constitutional but a human right.

(2.) Free and fair trial is a sine qua non of Article 21 of the Constitution. Any hindrance or obstruction would be violative of Article 14. Denial of a fair trial is as much an injustice to the accused as is to the victim and the society. It necessarily requires a trial before an impartial Judge, a fair prosecutor and in an atmosphere of judicial calm. Since the object of trial is to mete out justice and convict the guilty and protect the innocent, trial should be a search for the truth and not about over technicalities and must be conducted under such rules as would protect the innocent and punish the guilty. Justice should not only be done but should be seemed to have been done to the innocent. This is what the Apex Court reiterated in State of Haryana v. Ram Mehar and Ors., (2016) 8 SCC 762(2 Judge Bench).

(3.) Justice, Krishnaiyer, J in Maneka Sanjay Gandhi and Anr. v. Rani Jethmalani, (1979) 4 SCC 167 (2 Judge Bench) observed that assurance of a fair trial is the first imperative of dispensation of justice. Also referring to Ram Chander v. State of Haryana,(1981) 3 SCC 191 (2 Judge Bench) and Nellore v. Insha Ramana Reddy, 1972 Crl.L.J 1485 (2 Judge Bench) it was observed that "every criminal trial is a voyage of discovery in which truth is the quest, it is the duty of a presiding Judge to explore every avenue open to him in order to discover the truth and to advance the cause of justice."