Ensure Accused Receive Evidence: Kerala High Court Directs Compliance with Pre-Trial Procedures
The Kerala High Court has reiterated the importance of ensuring that accused individuals receive witness statements and a list of documents before a criminal trial commences. This reminder was issued in the context of a case titled [Akhil Sabu v. State of Kerala].
Legal Requirement and Court’s Directive
According to Rule 19(4) of the Rules of Practice, 1982, applicable in Kerala, it is mandatory for the prosecution to provide the accused with:
- Witness statements recorded during the investigation.
- A list of documents mentioned in Sections 173, 207, and 208 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Material objects to be relied upon during the trial.
The High Court, led by Justice A. Badharudeen, has ordered trial courts to ensure compliance with this rule by posting cases specifically to check adherence before the main trial hearings start. The court stated that:
“The registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to all Criminal Courts in the District Judiciary, with direction to ensure compliance of Rule 19(4) of the Criminal Rules of Practice in Kerala, 1982, before start of trial, by directing Public Prosecutors giving a specific posting for the said compliance and start trial only after ensuring the compliance of the mandate of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, without fail.”
Case Background
The directive came during the consideration of a petition filed by an individual seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against him. The petitioner argued that the trial was scheduled to begin without adhering to Rule 19(4), thus violating his right to a fair defense.
Importance of Rule 19(4)
Rule 19(4) ensures that the accused is fully informed of the evidence against them, including statements, documents, and material objects collected during the investigation, regardless of whether the prosecution intends to rely on them during the trial. This rule aims to facilitate a fair trial process.
Court’s Observation and Decision
The High Court highlighted the necessity of this rule, noting:
“On a plain reading of Rule 19(4) of the Rules, 1982, it is clear that, the accused shall be supplied with statements of witnesses recorded and a list of documents, as mentioned in Sections 173, 207 and 208 of the Cr.P.C. In addition to that, every accused shall be supplied with a list of material objects which the Investigating Officer relies upon. The list also shall specify the statements, documents and materials that are not relied upon by the Investigating.”
In the case at hand, the court found merit in the Public Prosecutor’s argument that the rule had been complied with and that the petitioner was attempting to delay the trial. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Representation
The petitioner was represented by advocates Navaneeth N Nath, Shinto Thomas, Gautham Krishna EJ, and Abhirami S. Senior Public Prosecutor Renjit George appeared for the State.
(With inputs from agency)
Share your news, articles, deals, columns, or press releases with us! Click the link to submit and join our platform today.
