Allahabad criticises Meerut-based trial court for acting hastily in double murder case

Prayagraj (UP), Jan 2 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court has criticised the action of a Meerut-based trial court for not waiting for a copy of the order passed by the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed in the related matter.

Commenting on the trial court's decision, the high court said "heavens wouldn't have fallen" if the additional sessions judge of Meerut had postponed the case for a day or two to examine the order passed by the Supreme Court and acted accordingly.

The above observation was made by Justice Kshitij Shailendra, allowing a criminal revision petition filed by Hamid and two others, by which the trial court had summoned them in a criminal case. The court said it did not approve of the approach of the trial court which acted hastily in the case.

The petitioners had challenged the sessions court's order dated August 17, 2024 before the high court, under which the trial court had issued summons to them to face trial in a case registered in Meerut. The case was related to the murder of two persons in May 2020.

After the investigation, the police removed the names of Hamid and two other applicants from the chargesheet. However, the prosecution filed an application to include these three which the trial court accepted and issued a summons against the accused. The accused then filed a criminal revision petition in the high court against the order.

During the hearing in the high court, the petitioners' lawyer argued that the trial court acted with undue haste and, despite knowing that an SLP against the order was pending before the Supreme Court on August 9, 2024, it disposed of the application on August 14, 2024, the date on which the SLP was decided.

The Supreme Court order, however, was uploaded on its website on August 17. Despite this, the trial court passed the impugned (under challenge) order.

The prosecution's lawyer argued that it was a "double murder" case and the names of the accused were mentioned in the main case. He argued that removing the names based solely on the statements of independent witnesses was incorrect. He contended that the accused had directly fired the shots and, therefore, they must be prosecuted.

In its 18-page judgment, the high court said the previous order had directed a decision in the case within 30 days, but a delay of a day or two while awaiting the Supreme Court's decision would not have been detrimental.

The court expressed its displeasure, saying such haste was unwarranted.

The high court, in its decision dated December 19, also observed that the courts should not do anything that diminishes people's faith in this "sacred institution". PTI COR RAJ KSS KSS