The Kerala High Court has acquitted a man convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment after he spent nearly 14 years in jail, ruling that he was denied a fair trial and subjected to severe procedural lapses.
A division bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan and Justice K V Jayakumar passed the judgment on January 12, observing that the trial conducted by the Sessions Court was marred by grave violations of the accused’s fundamental right to a fair hearing.
The High Court noted that during a significant portion of the trial, the accused was not represented by a competent lawyer and had to cross-examine key prosecution witnesses by himself. Moreover, several prosecution witnesses were examined in the absence of the accused, violating basic principles of criminal jurisprudence.
Disturbingly, the court found that the Sessions Judge herself conducted the chief examination of prosecution witnesses in the absence of a public prosecutor, which the High Court termed “illegal and unfair.”
The case, which arose from an incident on September 18, 2011, during Onam celebrations near Pampady in Kottayam, was committed to the Sessions Court in July 2012. The accused was convicted in October 2019 and sentenced to life imprisonment along with a fine of ₹50,000.
He remained in judicial custody throughout the 14 years of investigation, trial, and the High Court appeal.
Criticising the inordinate delay, the bench observed that after charges were framed, the matter was adjourned more than a hundred times over seven years. The reasons cited for these delays were found to be “unjustifiable and not compelling.”
“The Sessions Judge, as it appears from the order sheet, attributed much priority to other targeted cases than to the trial of a custodial matter,” the High Court remarked.
While the High Court acknowledged the prosecution’s case — that the accused stabbed the victim during a quarrel between two groups playing cards — it stressed that constitutional safeguards had been wholly ignored in the conduct of the trial.
“On a careful consideration of the records of the case, the relevant statutory provisions, the mandate of the Constitution and the binding precedents of the Supreme Court, we have no hesitation in holding that a fair trial was denied to the accused,” the court said.
Taking into account the accused’s prolonged pre-conviction custody, the court declined to order a fresh trial, calling such a move “neither just, fair, nor proper.”
The bench allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and life sentence, and ordered that the accused be released forthwith. It also directed that any fine paid by him be refunded.
