A single judge bench of high court acted irresponsibly by issuing notice to a sessions judge who had granted bail to an accused: Such actions of high court would instill fear among judges of the lower judiciary who would hesitate in granting bail in genuine cases for fear of being taken to task by the high court observed the bench of Justice Siddharth and Justice SQH Rizvi
Rajesh Pandey
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the trial court judges in many cases convict accused who ought to be acquitted, only to avoid action from the high court in criminal appeals.
While making this observation, a division bench of Allahabad High Court regretted a show cause notice issued in 2010 by a single judge of the high court to the then district judge of Aligarh for acquitting the accused in a dowry death case based on submission of counsel for informant without considering the full facts and the law involved in the case.
The division bench of Allahabad High Court comprising Justices Siddharth and Justice SQH Rizvi observed, “the single judge of this high court not only issued notice to the sessions judge but directed the matter to be placed before chief justice for kind perusal without waiting for reply of district and sessions Judge and deciding whether reply of the district and sessions Judge was satisfactory or not. Such conduct of the high court is responsible for the fear on the part of the judicial officers in the trial court and in many cases where the accused deserves clear acquittal bu the judgment of conviction and order of sentence is passed only because presiding officers want to avoid issuance of notice and action by high court ordered without properly considering their judgments and orders.”
The prosecution case was that the deceased Bhumika was married to Virendra Singh in June 2004 and after two years of marriage she died an unnatural death her family was informed that she had fallen from the terrace after which she succumbed to injuries. An FIR was registered in the case but later Virendra was acquitted by the trial court.
The present appeal was filed before the high court challenging his acquittal under section 304 B of IPC (dowry death).
The court while dismissing the appeal challenging acquittal said, “The notice issued by a single judge of this court on September 23, 2010, to the district and sessions judge, Aligarh, who passed the judgment and order under challenge, was replied by him stating that the offenses alleged 304-B (dowry death) and others are not proved against the appellants because they (prosecution) failed to prove that soon before her death deceased was subjected to any cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand of dowry, which is one of the vital ingredients for proving the offense of dowry death”.
The court further said, “We are in full agreement with the reply submitted by the district and sessions Judge, Aligarh to the notice issued by the single judge of this court. He has not committed any mistake in deciding the case and acquitting the appellants of charges under sections- 304-B (dowry death) and other sections. We have also reached the same conclusion.”
The judgment dated September 12 came into the limelight on Friday.
