NDLI: Naveen @ Ajay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Penal Code 1860
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Issue for consideration:Whether appellant was afforded a fair trial; whether he was deprived of his valuable legal rights.Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 – Appellant was convicted and sentenced for committing rape and murder of 3 months old girl child – His death sentence was confirmed by the High Court – Appellant contended that the entire trial was completed within a span of 15 days and appellant was not afforded a fair trial – Propriety:Held: The Order-sheet would clearly indicate that the trial was conducted in a hurried manner without providing ample and proper opportunity to the defence counsel, who was engaged through legal aid, to prepare himself effectively – It is also to be noted that copies of DNA Report, FSL Report and Viscera Report were not submitted along with the charge-sheet and were presented before the Court during the course of trial – When the reports were challenged by the accused before the High Court, it was brushed aside by observing that even if the authors of the reports were not called for evidence, in terms of Section 293 Cr.P.C., the reports are not open to question as the defence had an opportunity to cross-examine the authors of the reports during the trial – High Court was not correct in saying that the defence had an opportunity to cross-examine the experts – Accused, who was in jail and defended by a counsel from legal aid, was compelled by the Trial Court to produce defence witness of his own in one day – It was impossible for the accused himself to produce doctors, the authors of the Reports (Ex.P-72), in one day because the said experts are government servants and could not have attended the Court at the request of an accused in jail – There was no opportunity, in the real sense, to the appellant to cross-examine the experts – Therefore, the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the trial court for de novo trial by affording proper opportunity to the appellant to defend himself. [Paras 8, 10, 21, 22]Criminal Trial – Fair Trial – Definition of:Held: There can be no analytical, all-comprehensive or exhaustive definition of the concept of a fair trial, and it may have to be determined in seemingly infinite variety of actual situations with the ultimate object in mind viz. whether something that was done or said either before or at the trial deprived the quality of fairness to a degree where a miscarriage of justice has resulted – Each one has an inbuilt right to be dealt with fairly in a criminal trial – Denial of a fair trial is as much injustice to the accused as is to the victim and the society – Fair trial obviously would mean a trial before an impartial judge, a fair prosecutor, and the atmosphere of judicial calm – Fair trial means a trial in which bias or prejudice for or against the accused, the witnesses, or the cause which is being tried is eliminated – It is inherent in the concept of due process of law, that condemnation should be rendered only after the trial in which the hearing is a real one, not sham or a mere farce and pretence – Since fair hearing requires an opportunity to preserve the process, it may be vitiated and violated by an overhasty, stage-managed, tailored and partisan trial – It is thus settled that a hasty trial in which proper and sufficient opportunity has not been provided to the accused to defend himself/herself would vitiate the trial as being meaningless & stage-managed – It is in violation of the principle of judicial calm. [Para 16]Principle/Doctrine – Judicial Calm – Discussed. [Paras 16, 17]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 936
Petitioner	Naveen @ Ajay
Respondent	The State Of Madhya Pradesh
SCR	[2023] 14 S.C.R. 977
Judgement Date	2023-10-19
Case Number	489-490

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

Naveen @ Ajay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Preetam

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rameshwar & Ors.

Pappu @ Hari Om Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Devilal and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Mahesh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Gudu Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramanand

Parshuram Vs. State of M.p.

Yashwant Etc. Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Naveen @ Ajay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Naveen @ Ajay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Preetam

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rameshwar & Ors.

Pappu @ Hari Om Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Devilal and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Mahesh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Gudu Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramanand

Parshuram Vs. State of M.p.

Yashwant Etc. Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Naveen @ Ajay Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh