Kerala High Court Overturns Murder Conviction After 14 Years, Slams Trial Court Failures
The Kerala High Court has delivered a significant verdict, acquitting a man who spent fourteen years behind bars for a murder charge. The court set aside his conviction and life sentence, pointing to grave illegalities committed during the trial proceedings.
Case Background and Allegations
C G Babu, a resident of Pambady in Kottayam district, faced allegations of stabbing Vijeesh to death. The incident occurred on September 18, 2011, during an altercation while playing cards. This altercation was connected to an Onam programme at Kunnelpeedika in Pambady.
The prosecution built its case around these events. On October 16, 2019, the additional sessions court-II in Kottayam found Babu guilty. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of fifty thousand rupees under IPC Section 302.
Appeal and High Court's Scrutiny
Babu challenged this conviction through an appeal. A bench comprising Justices V Raja Vijayaraghavan and K V Jayakumar heard his plea. After careful consideration, the bench allowed the appeal, leading to Babu's acquittal.
The High Court identified serious procedural lapses by the trial court. It described the case as a classic example of how an accused person can be denied a fair trial. The bench emphasized that courts must provide equal opportunities to both prosecution and defense to present evidence.
Key Procedural Failures Highlighted
The court noted several critical failures in the trial process:
- Prolonged Detention: Babu remained in judicial custody for over seven years as an undertrial prisoner after his arrest on September 24, 2011. The order sheet did not clarify the reasons for this extended detention.
- Lack of Legal Representation: Initially, Babu had a lawyer. However, he relinquished the vakkalath in 2014. After that, he did not have any counsel of his choice or a legal aid lawyer. Consequently, he had to conduct cross-examination of witnesses on his own.
- Failure to Ensure Competent Counsel: The trial court did not ensure Babu had competent legal representation. This disregard violated directions issued by the Supreme Court of India.
- Evidence Recorded in Absence of Accused: The sessions judge recorded evidence from material witnesses and examined several witnesses without the accused being present.
- Judge Assuming Prosecutor Role: The judge conducted the chief examination herself, exceeding the court's powers and assuming the role of public prosecutor.
Unfair Trial and Piecemeal Proceedings
The High Court strongly criticized the sessions judge's approach, labeling it illegal and unfair. It reiterated established legal principles that mandate fair trials.
Furthermore, the trial proceeded in a piecemeal manner. It took nearly five years to conclude, which the court found unacceptable. Such delays and fragmented proceedings compromised the integrity of the judicial process.
Acquittal and Preventive Measures
Based on these findings, the bench set aside the conviction and sentencing. It directed the high court registry to forward a copy of the judgment to the director of the Kerala Judicial Academy.
This action aims to guide sessions judges and prevent similar lapses in future cases. The directive underscores the importance of adhering to procedural norms and ensuring justice is served fairly.
This ruling highlights critical issues within the judicial system, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to legal procedures to uphold the right to a fair trial.
