NDLI: Anokhilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Grant of free legal aid Entitlement to Criminal Trial Real and meaningful assistance Expeditious disposal
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012) Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Legal Services: Grant of free legal aid – Real and meaningful assistance – Entitlement to – On facts, in the case of rape and murder of a minor girl, appointment of counsel through legal services to represent the accused-appellant – The day the counsel appointed, on the same day charges framed against the appellant for offence punishable u/ss. 363, 366, 377, 376(2)(f) and 302 IPC r/w s. 6 of POCSO Act – Thereafter, conviction of appellant and imposition of death sentence and other sentences by courts below – On appeal, held: The day Amicus Curiae was named, on the same date, the counsel was called upon to defend the accused at the stage of framing of charges – Amicus Curiae did not have sufficient time to go through even the basic documents, nor the advantage of any discussion or interaction with the accused, and time to reflect over the matter – Even before the Amicus Curiae could come to grips of the matter, the charges were framed and trial itself was concluded within a fortnight – Approach adopted by the trial court, may have expedited the conduct of trial, but did not further the cause of justice – It left glaring gaps – Thus, in the process, the assistance that the appellant was entitled to in the form of legal aid, could not be real and meaningful – Counsel ought to have been afforded sufficient opportunity to study the matter and the infraction in that behalf resulted in miscarriage of justice – Judgment of conviction and orders of sentence passed by courts below against the appellant set aside directing de novo consideration wherein the counsel would take up the remaining issue – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 363, 366, 377, 376(2)(f) and 302 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s. 6.Advocates/Lawyer: Appointment as Amicus Curiae – Guidelines for, in cases where there is a possibility of life sentence or death sentence – Held: Advocates having put in minimum of 10 years practice at the Bar alone be considered to be appointed as Amicus Curiae or through legal services to represent an accused – In all matters dealt with by the High Court concerning confirmation of death sentence, Senior Advocates of the Court must first be considered to be appointed as Amicus Curiae – Counsel appointed as Amicus Curiae, to be provided some reasonable time to prepare the matter – Minimum seven days’ time may normally be considered to be appropriate and adequate.Criminal Trial – Expeditious disposal – Necessity of – Held: Expeditious disposal is required in criminal matters and that would naturally be part of guarantee of fair trial – However, the attempt to expedite the process should not be at the expense of the basic elements of fairness and the opportunity to the accused – The cause of justice must never be allowed to suffer or be sacrificed which is paramount – Thus, the process may be expedited, but fast tracking of process must never ever result in burying the cause of justice – Administration of criminal justice.Constitution of India: Art. 39A – Equal justice and free legal aid – Held: Article 39-A provides for free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities – Right to Free Legal Services is an essential ingredient of ‘reasonable, fair and just’ procedure for a person accused of an offence – Trial must be conducted in such a manner as will punish the innocent and punish the guilty – Counsel must be given sufficient and adequate time to prepare for the defence – Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 1399
Petitioner	Anokhilal
Respondent	State Of Madhya Pradesh
SCR	[2019] 18 S.C.R. 1196
Judgement Date	2019-12-18
Case Number	62

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Anokhilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Hallu and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Thakur Narwar Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Ajendra Nath Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Hukum Singh and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dal Singh & Ors.

Shiv Govind Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Mahesh S/o. Ram Narain Etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Teeka and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Dharam Singh and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Anokhilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Anokhilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Hallu and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Thakur Narwar Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Ajendra Nath Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Hukum Singh and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dal Singh & Ors.

Shiv Govind Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Mahesh S/o. Ram Narain Etc. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Teeka and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Dharam Singh and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Anokhilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh