A view of the Supreme Court.
Credit: PTI Photo
Noting that accused often took advantage of their acquittal in less stringent offence, the Supreme Court has ordered all cases arising out of a principal offence should be tried and decided by the same judge, unless any of the crime is meant for trial before a special court under the law.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Rajesh Bindal said, "Many a times, due to sheer lack of coordination, an accused in a case filed for a connected offence, as for example under the Arms Act, ends up being acquitted due to insufficient evidence produced by the prosecution and absence of proper assistance rendered to the court. Thus, leaving gaping loopholes in the case set up by the prosecution in the principal case."
The court said, the advantage of this acquittal is then taken by the accused in the connected case where the offence is more grievous and the punishment more stringent.
The court added, "All the offences should be tried before the same judge, instead of being sent to different courts."
The bench allowed an appeal filed by Shiv Kumar against the Allahabad HC's order and cancelled the bail granted to one accused Vishal in a double murder case also involving offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court directed the Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh, to take immediate remedial measures to sensitise and streamline the Directorate of Prosecution, which is the very backbone of the criminal justice system and cannot afford to falter.
In the instant case, the accused was separately tried for offences under the Arms Act and the Gangster Act. The bench said if not the Gangster Act, the offences under the Arms Act could have been tried before the court, which is dealing with the murder charge.
The court also expressed displeasure with the grant of bail within two years of the grievous offence, while noting that its previous order cancelling bail to another accused in the case was deliberately withheld and not brought to notice of the High Court.
"We are amazed at the reasons that have swayed the High Court to grant bail to the accused in such a heinous crime of double murder. The conduct of both, the Investigation Officer and the accused deserves to be deprecated," the bench said.
The HC had noted factors like overcrowding of jails, speedy trial being fundamental right of the accused, one sided probe, uncertainty regarding trial as factors for granting bail.
The court also flagged the state government's failure to challenge the bail order.
"But as it appears to be the trend in several cases, cancellation of bail applications are not moved by the state government, but by the private party/complainant," the bench said.