Dr.

Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow

Final Draft

Project Topic: “Fair Trial in the Criminal Justice System”

Submitted To:

Dr. Prem Kumar Gautam

Assistant Professor (Law)
Dr. R.M.L.N.L.U., Lucknow

Submitted By:

Deepak Kumar Rav

Enrollment no.- 160101059
Vth Semester

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

1
 ACKNOWLEGEMENT

Its a fact that any research work prepared, compiled or formulated in isolation is inexplicable
to an extent . This research work, although prepared by me , is a culmination of efforts of a
lot of people .

Firstly , I would like to thank our teacher for the subject of Criminal Law , Assistant
Professor Dr. Prem Kumar Gautam for giving such a topic for the project work which
assisted me in acquiring further knowledge in the respected field, I would like to thank him
for his valuable suggestions towards the making of this project .

Thereafter, I would also like to express my gratitude towards our seniors who played a vital
role in the compilation of this project work.

I cannot ignore the contributions made by my classmates and friends towards the completion
of this project work And I would also like to express my gratitude towards the library staff of
my college which assisted me in acquiring the sources necessary for the compilation of my
project .

Last , but not the least , I would like to thank the Almighty for obvious reasons .

Deepak Kumar Rav

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

2
 “TABLE OF CONTENTS”

CHAPTERIZATION:-

1) “Introduction”……………………………………………………………4

2) “Right to Fair Trial- a Human Right”……………………………………5

3) “Constitutional Provision”…………………………………………….....8

4) “Provisions Under CrPC”………………………………………………13

5) “Conclusion”……………………………………………………………19

6) “Bibliography”………………………………………………………….20

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

3
 INTRODUCTION

“The idea of fair trial has been embraced by every one of the nations in their regarded field of
laws. The reason behind the foundation of fair trial is to shield the normal man from out of
line methods for any foul play and infringement of major right. The principals of normal
equity are a definitive premise of fair trial framework. To the extent nation like India is
concerned the idea of fair trial is conceived under the protected law and other procedural
law.”

“Everybody has an inbuilt appropriate to be managed decently in a criminal preliminary.

Refusal of a fair trial is as much bad form to the charged and is to the people in question and
the general public. The fair trial of criminal offense comprises not just in specialized
recognition of the edges and standards of law yet in addition in acknowledgment and only
utilization of its standards in substance, to discover reality and avoid premature delivery of
equity.”

“Aims & Objectives”-:

“The aims and objectives of the project is to”-

1) “Know about the right to fair trial”

2) “Study the relevant provisions under CrPC”

Hypothesis-:

“According to the researcher the hypothesis of the project is that, “even after so many
provisions and rights related to fair trial only few people are able to face a fair trial.”

Research Methodology-:

“The method of writing adopted is Doctrinal one including both descriptive and Analytical.”

Sources Of Data-:

“The researcher has mainly relied upon primary as well as secondary sources e.g. Books,
Articles, Internet websites.”

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

4
 “Right to a Fair Trial- a human right”

“The right to fair trial is an essential right in all countries respecting the rule of law. A trial in
these countries that is deemed unfair will typically be restarted, or its verdict voided.
Different rights related with a fair trial are expressly announced in Article 10 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and
Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights, and also various different
constitutions and revelations all through the world. There is no coupling worldwide law that
characterizes what is or is certifiably not a fair trial, for instance the privilege to a jury
preliminary and other imperative strategies fluctuate from country to country.”

“The privilege to fair trial is exceptionally useful in various statements which speak to
standard global law, for example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
Despite the fact that the UDHR cherishes some fair trial rights, for example, the assumption
of honesty until the point that the denounced is demonstrated liable, in Articles 6, 7, 8 and 11,
the key arrangement is Article 10 which expresses that: "Everybody is qualified in full equity
for a reasonable and open hearing by an autonomous and fair council, in the assurance of his
rights and commitments and of any criminal accusation against him."

“A few years after the UDHR was embraced it was chosen that the privilege to a fair trial
ought to be characterized in more detail in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR). The privilege to a fair trial is ensured in Articles 14 and 16 of the ICCPR
which is official in universal law on the 72 states that have approved it. Article 14(1) builds
up the fundamental appropriate to a fair trial, article 14(2) accommodates the assumption of
blamelessness, and article 14(3) sets out a rundown of least fair trial rights in criminal
procedures. Article 14(5) builds up the privilege of an indicted individual to have a higher
court survey the conviction or sentence, and article 14(7) disallows twofold danger.”

Article 14(1) states that: "All people will be equivalent under the steady gaze of the courts
and councils. In the assurance of any criminal accusation against him, or of his rights and
commitments in a suit at law, everybody will be qualified for a reasonable and open hearing

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

5
by a capable, free and unbiased court set up by law. The press and general society might be
rejected from all or part of a preliminary for reasons of ethics, open request or national
security in a popularity based society, or when the enthusiasm of the private existences of the
gatherings so requires, or to the degree entirely vital in the feeling of the court in
extraordinary conditions where attention would bias the interests of equity; yet any judgment
rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law will be made open with the exception of where
the enthusiasm of adolescent people generally requires or the procedures concern wedding
question or the guardianship of kids."1

“The Geneva Conventions ensure warriors the privilege not to be put on preliminary for
battling in a war - except if they perpetrate an atrocity (a grave rupture) or other wrongdoing
(e.g., caught behind foe lines out of appropriate outfits or emblem while completing
undercover work or harm activities). Most held under the Geneva Conventions are not
blamed for a wrongdoing and consequently it would be an atrocity under the Geneva
Conventions to give them a preliminary. This insurance against getting a preliminary is
completely predictable with human rights law since human rights law forbids putting
individuals on preliminary when there is no wrongdoing to attempt them for. The Geneva
Conventions anyway ensure that anybody accused of an atrocity or other wrongdoing must
get a fair trial.”

The right to a fair trial is enshrined in articles 3, 7 and 26 of the African Charter on Human
and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR).2

The right to a fair trial is also enshrined in articles 5, 6 and 7 of the European Charter on
Human Rights and articles 2 to 4 of the 7th Protocol to the Charter.3

The right to a fair trial is furthermore enshrined in articles 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the American
Convention on Human Rights.4

The privilege to fairness under the steady gaze of the law is some of the time viewed as a
feature of the rights to a fair trial. It is normally ensured under a different article in universal
human rights instruments. The privilege qualifies people for be perceived as subject, not as

1
"International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights.
2
Doebbler, Curtis (2006). Introduction to International Human Rights Law. CD Publishing. p. 108.
3
Doebbler, Curtis (2006). Introduction to International Human Rights Law. CD Publishing. p. 108.
4
Doebbler, Curtis (2006). Introduction to International Human Rights Law. CD Publishing. p. 108.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
6
question, of the law. Universal human rights law allows no discrediting or special cases to
this human right. Firmly identified with the privilege to a fair trial is the forbiddance on ex
post facto law, or retroactive law, which is cherished in human rights instrument
independently from the privilege to fair trial and can not be restricted by states as indicated
by the European Convention on Human Rights and the American Convention on Human
Rights5.

5
Doebbler, Curtis (2006). Introduction to International Human Rights Law. CD Publishing. p. 108.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
7
 “CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS”:

“Fair trial is based on principle of natural justice. Constitution of India also provide for fair
trial of the accused. It has been all around acknowledged in the present day of progress that as
a human esteem no individual blamed for any offense ought to be rebuffed except if he has
been given a fair trial and his blame has been demonstrated in such preliminary. The idea of
fair trial can't e clarified in total terms. Reasonableness is relative idea and consequently
decency in criminal preliminary could be estimated just in connection to the accessible time
and assets and the overall human qualities in the general public. Article 21 gives the
assurance of life and individual freedom. As indicated by this article no individual will be
denied of his freedom aside from as indicated by methodology built up by law. As a wide
rule, it might be expressed that the freedom of a man ought not be taken away without noble
motivation. The detainment of charged individual preceding or pending preliminary is
probably going to cause immediate or circuitous checks in readiness of his guard and would
not in this way be very conductive to a fair trial.6 If the presence of accused cannot be
procured otherwise then he should by all means be arrested and detained.”

“Article 20 of the constitution gives insurance in regard of conviction for offenses. As

indicated by this article no individual will be sentenced for any offense aside from
infringement of a law in compel at the season of the commission of the offense, nor be
subjected to punishment more noteworthy than that which may have been incurred under the
law in drive at the season of the commission of the offense. It likewise gives insurance from
twofold danger. It additionally gives that no charged individual will be observer against
himself. This is additionally protected under area 25 and 26 of Indian proof Act by not
tolerating admission made before cop and police care.”

“Art 22(1), says, "No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being
informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to
consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.". It embodies two distinct
rights - the privilege to be recounted the grounds of arrest and the privilege to counsel a
lawful practioner of his decision. The second right of counseling a lawful professional of his

6
See,. R.V.Kelkar : outlines of criminal procedure, (1977) at p.33.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
8
decision really relies upon the primary right of being told about the grounds of arrest. On the
off chance that the individual doesn't know why he is being arrestd, he can't counsel a lawful
practioner seriously.”

In Harikishan vs State of Maharashtra7 , SC held that the grounds of arrest must be

communicated to the person in the language that he understands otherwise it would not
amount to sufficient compliance of the constitutional requirement.

“Art 22(2) that gives a fundamental right to the arrestd individual that he should be created
before an officer inside 24 long stretches of arrest. It says, "Each individual who is arrestd
and kept in guardianship will be created before the closest justice inside a time of twenty-four
long periods of such arrest barring the time fundamental for the voyage from the place of
arrest to the court of the officer and no such individual will be confined in care past the said
period without the expert of a judge.”

“In Khatri (II) vs State of Bihar8 has emphatically asked upon the State and its police to
guarantee that this established and legitimate necessity of bringing a arrestd individual before
a legal justice inside 24 hours be circumspectly met. This is a sound arrangement that enables
judges to keep a mind the police investigation. It is essential that the judges should attempt to
implement this prerequisite and when they discover it resisted, they should come intensely
upon the police.Further, in Sharifbai vs Abdul Razak9, SC held that if a police officer fails
to produce an arrested person before a magistrate within 24 hours, he shall be held guilty of
wrongful detention.”

“Article 22(4) provides that no law providing for preventive detention shall authorize the
detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless”-

(a) “An advisory body consisting of persons who are, or have been, or are qualified to be
appointed as, judges of high court has reported before the expiration of the said period
of three months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention:
Provided that nothing in this sub-clause shall authorize the detention of any person
beyond the maximum period prescribed by any law made by the parliament under
sub-clause (b) of clause 7; or”

7
AIR 1962
8
1981 SCC, SC
9
AIR 1961
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
9
 (b) “Such person is detained in accordance with the provisions of any law made by
parliament under sub-clause (a) and (b) of clause 7.”

“Section 22 (5) when any person is detained in pursuance of an order made under any law
providing for preventive detention, the authority making the order shall, as soon as may be,
communicate to such person the ground on which the order has been made and shall afford
him the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order.”

“Section 22 (6) provides that nothing in clause (5) shall require the authority making any
such order as is referred to in that clause to disclose facts which such authority considers to
be against the public interest to disclose.”

Article 22(7) parliament may by law prescribe-

a) “The circumstances under which, and the class or classes of cases in which, a person
may be detained for a period longer than three months under any law providing for
preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an Advisory Board in
accordance with the provisions of sub clause (a) of clause ( 4 );”
b) “the maximum period for which any person may in any class or classes of cases be
detained under any law providing for preventive detention; and”
c) “ the procedure to be followed by an Advisory Board in an inquiry under sub clause
(a) of clause ( 4 ) Right against Exploitation.”

“In D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal10 Supreme Court held the following requirements to
be followed in all cases of arrest or detention till legal provisions are made in that behalf as
preventive measures:”

(1) “The police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation of the arrestee
should bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations.
The particulars of all such police personnel who handle interrogation of the arrestee must be
recorded in a register.”

(2) That the cop completing the arrest of the arrestee will set up a reminder of arrest at the
season of arrest and such notice will be validated by atleast one observer, who might be either

10
D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal, AIR1997SC610
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
10
an individual from the group of the arrestee or a respectable individual of the region from
where the arrest is made. It will likewise be counter marked by the arrestee and will contain
the time and date of arrest.

(3) “A man who has been arrestd or confined and is being held in authority in a police
headquarters or cross investigation focus or other bolt up, will be qualified for have one
companion or relative or other individual known to him or having enthusiasm for his welfare
being educated, when practicable, that he has been arrestd and is being kept at the specific
place, except if the validating observer of the notice of arrest is himself such a companion or
a relative of the arrestee.”

(4) “The time, place of arrest and scene of guardianship of an arrestee must be advised by the
police where the following companion or relative of the arrestee lives outside the region or
town through the Legal Aid Organization in the District and the police headquarters of the
zone concerned telegraphically inside a time of 8 to 12 hours after the arrest.”

(5) The individual arrestd must be made mindful of this privilege to have somebody educated
of his arrest or confinement when he is put collared or is kept.

(6) “A section must be made in the journal at the place of confinement with respect to the
arrest of the individual which will likewise reveal the name of the following companion of
the individual who has been educated of the arrest and the names and particulars of the police
authorities in whose care the arrestee is.”

(7) “The arrestee should, where he so asks for, be additionally analyzed at the season of his
arrest and major and minor wounds, if any present on his/her body, must be recorded around
then. The "Investigation Memo" must be marked both by the arrestee and the cop affecting
the arrest and its duplicate gave to the arrestee.”

(8) “The arrestee ought to be subjected to restorative investigation by a prepared specialist at

regular intervals amid his detainment in guardianship by a specialist on the board of affirmed
specialists selected by Director, Health Services of the concerned State or Union Territory.
Chief, Health Services should get ready such a reformatory for all Tehsils and Districts too.”

(9) “Copies of all the documents including the memo of arrest, referred to above, should be
sent to the illaqa Magistrate for his record.”

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

11
(10) “The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation, though not
throughout the interrogation.”

(11) “A police control room should be provided at all district and state headquarters, where
information regarding the arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be
communicated by the officer causing the arrest, within 12 hours of effecting the arrest and at
the police control room it should be displayed on a conspicuous notice board.”

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

12
 “PROVISIONS UNDER CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE”

“The system adopted by the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred as the
Code) is the adversary system based on the accusatorial method. In adversarial system
responsibility for the production of proof is put on the contradicting party that is indictments
with the judge going about as an impartial arbitrator between the gatherings. By differentiate,
in inquisitorial preliminary framework duty regarding the generation of proof at preliminary
is the activity of the preliminary judge and it is the preliminary judge who chooses which
witnesses will be called at preliminary and who does the greater part of the scrutinizing of
observers. The foe framework is pretty much in view of the thought of compromise of open
and private interests, that is open enthusiasm for rebuffing the miscreant and counteracts him
to carry out more wrongdoings and private enthusiasm for keeping the unjust feelings and
secure his life and individual freedom. This arrangement of criminal preliminary accept that
the state, on one hand, by utilizing its investigative organizations and government insight will
indict the miscreant who, then again, will likewise take plan of action of best guidance to test
and counter the confirmations of the prosecution”.11

But if we take a close look of the Code then we will find that there are some provisions which
negate the strict adherence of the adversarial trial system.

“BASIC FAIR TRIAL CRITERIA”

“The standards against which a trial is to be assessed in terms of fairness are numerous,
complex, and constantly evolving. They may comprise restricting commitments that are
incorporated into human rights settlements to which the state is a gathering. Be that as it may,
they may likewise be found in archives which, however not formally official, can be taken to
express the course in which the law is advancing.”

“Arrangements as respect arrest are contained in area 41 to 60A of crpc, 1973. In this part a
significant number of the arrangement identifies with the fair trial. Area 4 gives that a police
may arrest without warrant thus he has motivation to trust that offense has been submitted by
the individual and arrest is vital as indicated in this segment. Section 41 –B provides that the
police shall inform the family member of the arrested person. Section 41-D provides that the

11
K.N.C.Pillai (ed),R.V.Kelkar’s Criminal Procedure , at 336(5th edn.)
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
13
arrested person shall be entitle to meet an advocate of his choice during interrogation, though
not through out interrogation. Section 49 gives that no individual will be subjected to more
control than is important to keep his departure. Segment 50 of this code gives that the blamed
must be educated for the full particulars of the offense for which he is arrestd or every single
other ground for such arrest. It additionally gives that if the offense is bailable one then the
blamed must be educated for his entitlement to outfit bail and he may mastermind sureties for
his benefit. Segment 50A makes a commitment of individual making the arrest to advise
about the arrest and place where the denounced individual is confined to the designated
individual. Segment 56 gives that the charged individual will be taken to the magistrateor
officer incharge of a police headquarters ithout sensible postponement. Segment 57 gives that
the sensible time ought to be inside 24 hours selective of the time fundamental for the voyage
from the place of arrest to the judge's court.”

“Arrangements as respect bail are contained in Sections 436-450 of Cr.P.C., 1973. The bail
arrangements go for anchoring the arrival of a man who has been put in the slammer as an
under preliminary or accused of some bailable and non-bailable offenses. The reason for
existing is that a man require not be kept in the police bolt ups without being accused of any
offense under the Criminal law. There are no immovable principles with respect to allow or
refusal of bail. Each case must be considered without anyone else merits. The issue
dependably calls for sensible exercise of attentiveness by the courts. Where the offense is of a
genuine sort the court needs to choose the topic of allow of bail in the light of such
contemplations as the nature and earnestness of the offense, the character of proof, conditions
that are impossible to miss to the denounced, sensible probability of quality of the charged
not being anchored at the preliminary, the sensible dread of an observer being messed with,
the bigger enthusiasm of the general population or such comparable different contemplations.
In the bailable cases, the allow of bail involves course. It might be given either by the cop
responsible for the police headquarters having the charged in his authority or by the court.
The discharge might be requested on the charged executing a bond and even without surety.
In non-bailable cases, the denounced might be discharged on bail either by the court or a cop,
however no bail can be allowed where the blamed shows up on sensible grounds to be
blameworthy of an offense culpable either with death or with detainment forever. This rule
does not apply to a person under 16 years of age, a woman, or a sick or infirm person. No
doubt, liberty of a person must be zealously bailed by the court, nonetheless, when a person is
accused of a serious offence like murder, and his successive bail applications are rejected on
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
14
merit there being prima-facie material, the prosecution is entitled to place correct facts before
the court; liberty of the accused on bail should not be construed as the sole concern of the
court. The Supreme Court of India has, however, held that though a person accused of a
bailable offence is entitled to be released on bail pending his trial, if his conduct subsequent
to his release is found to be prejudicial to a fair trial, he forefeits his right to be released on
bail and such forefeiture can be made effective by invoking the inherent powers of the High
Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.”

“Section 438 of Cr.P.C.,1973 provides a unique provision for grant of "anticipatory bail." the
necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons
tried to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing or for other purposes
by getting detained in jails for some days. Apart . . . from false cases where there are
reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond,
or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first
to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail."12. Appeal,
Reference, Review and Revision.”

The criminal justice system provides measures for preferring appeal, reference, review or
revision in order to avoid miscarriage of justice.13 If the finding come to by the preliminary
court depends on conceivable reasons or the preliminary court's discoveries can't be said to be
outlandish, the re-appraising court ought to be moderate in exasperating the preliminary
court's finding of certainty regardless of whether it was conceivable to achieve an alternate
end on the record in light of the fact that the preliminary judge has the upside of seeing and
hearing the observers and the underlying assumption of blamelessness for the denounced isn't
debilitated by his absolution.“The Constitution of India additionally gives that an interest will
mislead the Supreme Court for any judgement,or last request of the high court in a criminal
continuing, if the High Court guarantees that the case includes a considerable inquiry of law
with regards to the elucidation of the Constitution. However, where the High Court refuses to
give such a certificate, the Supreme Court may, on being satisfied that the case involves a
substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, grant special leave to
appeal from such judgement, or final order or determination or sentence. It further states that
an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgement, final order or sentence in a

12
See 41st report of the Law Commission of India
13
374-412 of CrPc, 1973.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
15
criminal proceeding of a High Court, if the High Court (a) has on appeal reversed an order of
acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death or (b) has withdrawn for trials
before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and has on such trials
convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death or (c) certifies that the case is a fit
one for appeal to the Supreme Court.”

“Pre-Trial”

“It is the statutory right of the police to carry out the investigation of a crime before a
prosecution is launched, and it cannot be interfered with by the courts.14 It might be seen that
the elements of the legal and of the police are complimentary, not covering; the court's
capacity starts when a charge is favored before it and not until at that point. The denounced
individual might be kept in the guardianship of the police for a time of 15 days, therefore
empowering the police to finish the investigation of the wrongdoing. Be that as it may, an
aggregate time of the authority might be up to 60 days when the investigation identifies with
a genuine offense or 90 days when the investigation identifies with an offense culpable with
death or detainment forever or detainment for a term of at the very least 10 years,and such
period will be translated legal guardianship and not police care. In the event that the police
can't finish the investigation inside 90 days then the denounced individual will be discharged
on bail.”

The investigation procedure starts on a data given to a cop and such data is known as the First
Information Report. The First Information Report is an imperative archive in a criminal
preliminary and might be placed in proof to help or repudiate the proof of the individual who
gave the data. The target of the First Information Report is to set the criminal law in
movement and from the perspective of the researching office to get data about the supposed
criminal exercises in order to have the capacity to find a way to follow and to convey to book
the guilty.

“The criminal trial process makes it clear that trial should be fair and as such it has been
emphasised that confession made to police shall be non-admissible; confession extracted by
torture or third degree method can be pleaded at trial. Confession as to the commission of an
offence must be voluntary and recorded before a Magistrate or a respectable person. The

14
154-176 of CrPc, 1973
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
16
Cr.P.C, and Indian Evidence Act a proprio vigro state that a confession made by an accused
person to a police officer is inadmissible in evidence; if a person in police custody desires to
make a confession he must do so in the presence of a Magistrate. A Magistrate shall record
the confession if he is satisfied that it is voluntary.”

“An accused kept either in the custody of police or judicial custody has to be provided with
humane and hygienic living conditions during lock-ups. This is so because the accused is
presumed to be innocent unless proved guilty. Jail Manuals prescribe that there ought not be
overcrowdedness in the cells; the undertrials should be provided with recreational facilities.”

“Trial Stage”

“A criminal trial begins with the filing of a case. The Cr.P.C, states that "no court shall take
cognizance of an offence after the expiry of the period of limitation and the period of
limitation shall be:”

(a) six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only;

(b) one year, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one
year;

(c) three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
but not exceeding three years;

(d) “the period of limitation in relation to offences which are punishable with more severe
punishment shall be determined by the court if the offence is punishable with imprisonment
exceeding three years or severe punishments.”

“The object is to prevent the parties from filing cases after a long time as a result of which
material evidence may vanish and also to prevent the filing of vexations and belated
prosecutions.”

Every trial begins with the charges and every charge shall state the offence with which the
accused is charged.15 The charge will give the blamed full notice for the offense charged
against him. The motivation behind the charge is to tell the blamed individual as correctly

15
211-224 of CrPc, 1973.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
17
and succinctly as conceivable of the issue with which he is charged and should pass on to him
with adequate lucidity and sureness what the indictment plans to demonstrate against him and
of which he needs to clear himself.

A criminal trial may take place either before a Magistrate or Court of Sessions as the nature
of the case may be.16

A. Mode of Taking and Recording Evidence

“It is obligatory that evidence for prosecution and defence should be taken in the presence of
the accused.17 A trial is vitiated by failure to examine the witnesses in the presence of the
accused; mere cross investigation in the presence of the accused is not sufficient.”

“Speedy Trials”

It is basic that each criminal preliminary ought to be finished quickly, speedily and
proficiently. The Supreme Court of India in August 1996 has communicated that the
preliminary court ought not squander its opportunity when it is genuinely fulfilled that there
is no prospect of the case finishing off with conviction. In the event that the preliminary court
judge is relatively sure that the preliminary would just be a pointless activity or a sheer
exercise in futility, it is fitting to truncate or cut the procedures at the phase of confining the
charge under applicable arrangements of the Cr.P.C., and release the blamed.

“In spite of the fact that it is basic to finish the preliminary quickly, speedily and effectively
yet there are disturbances with the criminal preliminary process amid pre-preliminary and in
addition preliminary stages. For example, the police which are to finished the investigation of
wrongdoing inside the endorsed time limits devour substantially more time than
recommended by law. This outcomes in the grieving of the undertrials in prisons for a more
drawn out period than the time of the conviction. The adversary procedure is also responsible
for the delayed trials and there are studies which tell that delay is a riddle wrapped in mystery
inside an enigma. Indecisiveness is the cause of both delay and unpleasantness. It could be
avoided if detention on false grounds is eased; adjournments just on demands are
discouraged; strike and cessation by an advocate is given a full stop.”

16
225-265 of CrPc, 1973.
17
272-299 of CrPc, 1973.
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
18
 “CONCLUSION”

“One Principal object of criminal law is to protect society by punishing the offenders.
However, justice and fair play require that no one be punished without a fair trial. A person
might be under a thick cloud of suspicion of guilt, he might have been even caught red-
handed, and yet he is not to be punished unless and until he is tried and adjudged to be guilty
by a competent court. In the organization of equity it is of prime significance that equity
ought not exclusively be done yet should likewise seem to have been finished. Further, it is
one of the cardinal standards of criminal law that everybody is attempted to be blamelessness
except if his blame is demonstrated past sensible uncertainty in a preliminary before an
unprejudiced and skilled court.”

Therefor it turns out to be totally fundamental that each individual blamed for wrongdoing is
brought under the steady gaze of the court for preliminary and that all the proof showing up
against him is made accessible to the court for choosing as to his blame or honesty.

After such a significant number of arrangements and laws individuals are still not having a
fair trial. Keeping in mind the end goal to have sufficient bits of knowledge into fair trial
practically as opposed to basically it is basic to have a top to bottom investigation of
preliminary courts. Such an investigation would scatter the grievance against the legal
arrangement of the nation. Accordingly grievances depend on realities that, "higher courts are
correct on the grounds that they are unrivaled, not prevalent in light of the fact that they are
correct." The preliminary judge, truth be told, handles the main part of legal business. It
might in any case, be not imagined that the judges don't need the general population to
comprehend the legal capacity; tragically, there are moderately few individuals to
comprehend, decipher and clarify the court's job in more extensive terms. “It could be said
individuals know less about the case than they do about the Parliament or the political parties.
Trial judges handle the bulk of judicial business because they preside over trials among other
things including management of case processing, approval of plea bargaining, supervision of
the settlement process, monitoring remedial decrees--they as such experience the drama of
the adversary process. This inevitably influences judicial decision-making and behaviour. A
trial judge is not a mechanical scale or computer but is a human being. So the trial judges
vary in their respective qualities of intelligence, perspective, attentiveness and other mental
and emotional characteristics of operation while they are listening to and observing
witnesses. Fatigue of the trial judge, that is, after how many cases the trial judge cannot
FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
19
function at ease and the cases heard and tried in fatigue may hamper or affect the fair trial,
may be one assumption amongst others to make an in-depth study of trial courts in order to
have an assessment of fair trial in criminal proceedings that is functional.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books-:

 R.V.Kelkar, “criminal procedure” 6th edition, 2017

 The code of criminal procedure code, 1973
 The constitution of India

Internet source:

 http://www.ksl.edu.np/cpanel/pics/concept_of_fair_trial_awani.pdf
 http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/fair_trial.pdf
 www.humanrights.coe.int/Intro/eng/GENERAL/trial.htm

FAIR TRIAL IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

20