top of page
There can't be a generalised presumption of prejudice to an Accused merely by reason of any omission or inadequate questions put to an Accused
Fainul Khan Vs State of Jharkhand and Ors
AIR 2019 SC 4858; Criminal Appeal Nos. 937, 938 and 939 of 2011
About/from the judgment:
There cannot be a generalised presumption of prejudice to an Accused merely by reason of any omission or inadequate questions put to an Accused thereunder. Ultimately it will be a question to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case including the nature of other evidence available, the kind of questions put to an Accused, considered with anything further that the Accused may state in his defence. In other words, there will have to be a cumulative balancing of several factors. While the rights of an Accused to a fair trial are undoubtedly important, the rights of the victim and the society at large for correction of deviant behaviour cannot be made subservient to the rights of an Accused by placing the latter at a pedestal higher than necessary for a fair trial.
In Sukha v. State of Rajasthan, MANU/SC/0026/1956 : 1956 SCR 288, it was observed as follows:
35. .....We have recently decided that we will be slow to entertain question of prejudice when details are not furnished; also the fact that the objection is not taken at an early stage will be taken into account.
Read the Judgment
Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!
Formats for use
bottom of page