SHAIK MUKTHAR Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH NOW STATE OF TELANGANA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
State Of Andhra Pradesh Now State Of Telangana
Referred Judgements :-
RAKESH AND ANR V. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)This appeal is filed questioning the judgment dtd. 20.03.2019 passed by the High Court of the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in Criminal Appeal No. 1140 of 2013 confirming the conviction of the appellants for the offence under Sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( "IPC ") and sentencing the appellants to undergo imprisonment for two years. The Trial Court had sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years. We find from the judgment of the High Court that the were not heard in the High Court. The appellants advocate remained absent on the date of hearing. The appellants should not have been penalized for the same.
(2.)It is by now well settled by a catena of judgments such as the decision of this Court in Rakesh and Anr V. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2011(12) SCC 512, that it is in the interest of justice to appoint an amicus curiae to assist the court where the accused is unrepresented. The Court may also refer the matter to the Legal Services Committee, which may appoint an advocate to represent the accused. The High Court, unfortunately, has not chosen to either appoint an Amicus curiae or to refer the matter to the Legal Services Committee requesting it to appoint an advocate. Hence, the matter is fit to be remitted to the High Court.
(3.)However, we have chosen to appreciate the evidence placed on record having regard to the fact that the incident occurred in the year 2011 and that the accused have been in custody for about 8 months. It is relevant to note that Accused No. 1, the husband of the deceased, was charged separately under Sec. 302 of the IPC, and was convicted by the Trial Court as well as the High Court. He has not questioned the judgment of conviction and consequently is undergoing sentence of life imprisonment.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.