A fair trial has a sacred purpose, both the prosecution and the accused should be heard before a trial is scheduled: High Court of Kerala

Judge K. Babu noted that Rule 77A(2) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, Kerala 1982 requires that both sides must be heard before a date is fixed for the taking of evidence.

The plaintiff, who is accused in the case before the Special Court for NDPS Law Cases at Thodupuzha, had filed an application before the court seeking adjournment of the hearing as his lawyer is involved in another case. The court rejected the application on the ground that the ground on which the plaintiff had sought the adjournment was inadequate. Against this order, the plaintiff approached the Supreme Court.

The court ruled that a defendant should not be disadvantaged in a trial.

“A fair trial has a sacred purpose. It has the demonstrable goal of ensuring that the accused is not disadvantaged.”

The Supreme Court observed that the accused has the right to be defended by a lawyer of his choice. The court said that this right is guaranteed by Article 22(1) of the Constitution, Section 303 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the corresponding Section 340 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

The court instructed the trial court to set the new date after hearing the prosecution and the accused.

Plaintiff’s Counsel: K. Siju, S. Abhilash, Anjana Kannath, Mariya Jose

Counsel for the defendant: Adv. G. Sudheer

Case number: OP (Crl.) No. 639 of 2024

Case Title: Asanul Banna v. State of Kerala and another

Quote: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 581