High time courts revert to practice of day-to-day trials in sensitive cases: SC

New Delhi, Sep 25 (PTI) The Supreme Court has said the practice of conducting day-to-day trials, particularly in sensitive cases, was given a complete go-by, stressing courts should revert to it.

Observing the right to speedy trial was implicit in Article 21 of the Constitution, the apex court said all high courts need to constitute a committee to discuss this issue very seriously for the benefit of their respective district judiciaries.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan said for reverting to the old practice of conducting trials on a day-to-day basis, it is necessary to understand the current social, political and administrative scenario including the way the police is functioning.

"The practice of conducting trials on a day-to-day basis more particularly in important or sensitive cases as was the tradition about thirty years ago has been given a complete go-by. We sincerely believe that it is high time that the courts revert to that practice," the bench said in its September 22 order.

The top court's order came on a plea by the CBI challenging a September last year order of the Calcutta High Court granting bail to an accused in a rape case.

The bench said one of the significant factors contributing to delays in justice system was the discretionary practice of non-continuous criminal trials, where evidence was heard by the court in "piecemeal fashion", with cases effectively spread out over the course of many months or even years.

"While limited judicial or court resources and a shortage of available court time due to the volume of cases are often cited for the use of this discretionary practice, the costs of non-continuous trials to both parties and to the justice system as a whole can far outweigh the perceived benefits," it said.

The top court noted it is true that courts have the discretion to defer cross-examination.

"But we do not approve the practice prevailing in the trial courts across the country that the examination-in-chief of a particular witness is recorded in a particular month and his cross-examination would follow in particular subsequent month," it said.

The bench said the legal position was that once the examination of witnesses starts, the court concerned must continue the trial from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendance were examined, except those whom the public prosecutor had given up.

"We are at pains to note that it is almost a common practice and regular occurrence that the trial courts flout the said mandate with impunity," it said.

The top court said even when witnesses were present, cases were adjourned on far less serious reasons or even on "flimsy grounds".

It said the legislature itself has frowned at granting adjournment on flimsy grounds.

The bench said the chief justices of high courts might direct their administrative side to issue a circular to the respective district judiciaries stating among other things that proceedings in every inquiry or trial should be held expeditiously.

It said the circular should state that when the stage of examination of witnesses starts, it should be continued from day-to-day till all witnesses were examined, except special reasons have to be recorded in writing.

The bench suggested that the court should not grant adjournment to suit the convenience of the advocate concerned except on very exceptional grounds, like bereavement in the family and similar reasons duly supported by memo.

"The said inconvenience of an advocate is not a 'special reason' for the purpose of bypassing the immunity of Section 309 of the CrPC," it said.

Section 309 of the erstwhile CrPC deals with power to postpone or adjourn proceedings.

The bench said the circular should also state about what should be kept in mind in case of non-cooperation of accused or his lawyer.

"In case of non-cooperation of the counsel, the court shall satisfy itself whether the non-cooperation is in active collusion with the accused to delay the trial. If it is so satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing, it may, if the accused is on bail, put the accused on notice to show cause why the bail cannot be cancelled," it said.

The bench said trial in the case be completed by December 31. PTI ABA ABA AMK AMK