“Non-Availability Of Vital And Important Basic Records”: Allahabad HC Sets Aside Conviction in 42 Yr Old Murder Case
|The Allahabad High Court set aside conviction in a 42-year-old murder case due to non-availability of “vital and important” basic records of the trial.
The Court explained that if a substantial portion of the trial court record is not available before the Appellate Court, an endeavour should be made for the reconstruction of the record. Firstly, the Court stated that if reconstruction is not possible to facilitate the High Court to hear and dispose of the appeal, only then should the possibility be looked into for the retrial of the case.
Secondly, if due to the loss of vital and basic records of the trial court, retrial and fresh adjudication of the matter is not possible, then in that case the impugned judgment and order should not be permitted to operate and the matter shall stand closed.
A Single Bench of Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava observed, “Hence, in view of the legal principle enumerated in the aforesaid judgments, in my view, nothing remains in this appeal and on account of non-availability of the vital and important basic records, the conviction order cannot be sustained. This Court has no other alternative in these circumstances but to allow the appeal and set-aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and to acquit him.”
Advocate R.K. Kanaujiya appeared for the appellant.
A criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgement of the trial court that convicted him under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC.
The appellant prayed for acquittal submitting that the entire record (except the original judgment and order of the trial court) of the case was weeded out as per report of the District Judge, and therefore, the hearing of the Appeal was not possible for want of record. The appeal pertained to the year 1982.
The High Court took note of the report sent by the District Judge wherein it was submitted that reconstruction of the trial court record was not possible and due to “non-reconstruction of the trial court record, retrial of this case is also not possible.”
“In the present case, as admitted by the prosecution itself, since the reconstruction of the record is not possible and no other record except the impugned judgment and order of the trial court is available, as a natural consequence thereof, retrial of the case is also not possible.” the Court remarked.
The Court referred to the decision in State of U.P. v. Abhai Raj Singh (2004), wherein the Apex Court held that if reconstruction was not possible to facilitate the High Court to hear and dispose of the appeals and the further course of retrial and fresh adjudication by Sessions Court was also rendered impossible due to loss of vitally important basic records, in that case and situation only, “the direction given in the impugned judgment shall operate and the matter shall stand closed.”
Consequently, the Court held, “In the light of the above discussions and the circumstances mentioned above,we have no other alternative but to allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and to acquit him.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Ram Singh v. State (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:147793)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates G.P. Dixit, R.K. Kanaujiya and Swetash Agrawal