Published on: October 16, 2023 at 10:52 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Darbara Singh v. State of Punjab (2012)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that “Failure of justice” covers unjust conviction as well as acquittal of the guilty due failure to produce requisite evidence for prosecution. It is further held that the plea of prejudice must be in relation to investigation or trial and if it is established that serious prejudice has been caused to the person then it is also assumed that the rights of the person under criminal jurisprudence have been compromised and thus the such orders are deemed to be revisited by the Hon’ble Court.
21. “Failure of justice” is an extremely pliable or facile expression, which can be made to fit into any situation in any case. The court must endeavour to find the truth. There would be “failure of justice”; not only by unjust conviction, but also by acquittal of the guilty, as a result of unjust failure to produce requisite evidence. Of course, the rights of the accused have to be kept in mind and also safeguarded, but they should not be overemphasised to the extent of forgetting that the victims also have rights.
It has to be shown that the accused has suffered some disability or detriment in respect of the protections available to him under the Indian criminal jurisprudence. “Prejudice” is incapable of being interpreted in its generic sense and applied to criminal jurisprudence.
The plea of prejudice has to be in relation to investigation or trial, and not with respect to matters falling outside their scope. Once the accused is able to show that there has been serious prejudice caused to him, with respect to either of these aspects, and that the same has defeated the rights available to him under criminal jurisprudence, then the accused can seek benefit under the orders of the court.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra