Accused entitled for fair trial, opportunity be given to make representation against sentence: SC

An accused is entitled to a fair trial and must be given an opportunity to make a representation against the sentence to be imposed on him and should be given a fair opportunity to defend himself, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday.A three-judge bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao made the observations while expressing displeasure over the lack of legal assistance to a man who was awarded a death sentence in a rape and murder case.It is a travesty of justice as the Appellant was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself.

An accused is entitled to a fair trial and must be given an opportunity to make a representation against the sentence to be imposed on him and should be given a fair opportunity to defend himself, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday.

A three-judge bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao made the observations while expressing displeasure over the lack of legal assistance to a man who was awarded a death sentence in a rape and murder case.

''It is a travesty of justice as the Appellant was not given a fair opportunity to defend himself. This is a classic case indicating the disturbing tendency of Trial Courts adjudicating criminal cases involving rape and murder in haste. It is trite law that an accused is entitled to a fair trial which is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. ''In respect of the order of conviction and sentence being passed on the same day, the object and purpose of Section 235 (2) CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code) are that the accused must be given an opportunity to make a representation against the sentence to be imposed on him. A bifurcated hearing for convicting and sentencing is necessary to provide an effective opportunity to the accused,'' the bench also comprising Justices B R Gavai and B V Nagarathna said.

The observations came while commuting the death sentence awarded to a tribal man for raping and murdering an 11-year girl to life imprisonment.

The top court said the man was aged 25 years on the date of commission of the offence and making his livelihood by doing manual labour. It said no evidence has been placed by the prosecution on record to show that there is no probability of rehabilitation and reformation of the appellant and the question of an alternative option to a death sentence is foreclosed. ''The Appellant had no criminal antecedents before the commission of the crime for which he has been convicted. There is nothing adverse that has been reported against his conduct in jail. Therefore, the death sentence requires to be commuted to life imprisonment,'' the bench said.

The apex court, however, sentenced the man to life imprisonment for 30 years during which he shall not be granted remission taking into account the barbaric and savage manner in which the offences of rape and murder were committed by him on a hapless 11-year-old girl. PTI PKS RKS RKS