Right Of Accused To Representation Integral Part Of Article 21, Trial Court Must Appoint Amicus In Absence Of Defence Counsel
Case: R.K.Emu Farms and others v. State Represented By Inspector of Police
Coram: Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy
Case No.: CRL.A.No.295 of 2021
Court Observation: Therefore, from the combined reading of the aforementioned judgments, it would be clear that right of the accused to be represented by a counsel has been held to be an integral part under Article 21 of the Constitution of India though the Court may not be helpless and proceeded further when the counsel for the accused is absent, still, it is seen that there must be an Advocate to represent the cause of the accused even if the learned counsel for the accused is absent for any reason.
In that view of the matter, I hold that the procedure adopted by the Trial Court in not even appointing an Amicus Curiae to represent the accused and hear the said Amicus Curiae before pronouncement of the judgment is not a correct procedure and therefore, the valuable right of the accused which is held to be a part of Article 21 of Constitution of India is violated. In view thereof, I am of the view that the judgment of the Trial Court has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration. In case the advocate representing the cause of the accused, for one reason or the other was not available, it was open to the Court to appoint an Amicus Curiae to assist the Court but the cause in any case ought not to be allowed to go unrepresented.
Previous Posts
Defense On Merits Is Not To Be Considered At Stage Of Framing Of Charge And/Or At The Stage Of Discharge Application Download Judgement
