Constitution of India, 1950
Article 21—Right to life—Reputation of an individual is an isegregable facet of his right to life with dignity.
[Para 89]
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Proviso to Section 372—Retrospective operation—Right to file an appeal is a statutory right and it can be circumscribed by the conditions of the statute granting it—Proviso to Section 372 of CrPC is not an exception to Section 372, but a stand-alone legal provision—Amendment so made in Section 372 CrPC by adding a proviso in the year 2009 creating a substantive right of appeal is not retrospective in nature—A statute which creates new rights shall be construed to be prospective in operation unless otherwise provided, either expressly or by necessary implication.
[Para 72]
Evidence Act, 1872
Section 145—Lack of thorough cross-examination by Public Prosecutors in criminal appeals, specially with hostile witnesses—Prosecutors often only confront them with their police statement, aiming to highlight contradictions but not fully explore the witness’s testimony—Purpose of cross-examination is to challenge the accuracy and credibility of the witness’s statement, uncover hidden facts, and establish if the witness is lying—Public Prosecutors should conducted detailed cross-examinations to reveal the truth and establish the witness’s first hand knowledge of the incident described in the police statement.
[Para 78]
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 302—Offence of murder—Acquittal of accused reversed by High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction—Appeal—High Court relied upon the police statement of prosecution witness recorded under Section 161 of CrPC instead of his oral testimony before trial court—Said prosecution witness turned hostile and was cross-examined by public prosecutor under Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act—Material elicited as contradiction by use of Section 145 of the Evidence Act is not substantive evidence—Unless there is substantive evidence, it cannot be acted upon legally particularly to base a conviction—High Court committed an egregious error in reversing the acquittal and passing an order of conviction in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction and that too without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellants—Appellants were unjustly subjected rigorous imprisonment over three months—Impugned judgment of High Court is set aside and State directed to pay rupees five lakhs each to the three appellants towards compensation.
[Paras 74, 75 & 99]
Public Prosecutor
Appointment of—AGPs and APPs in respective High Courts should be appointed solely on the merit of the person—State Government owes a duty to ascertain the ability of the person; how proficient the person is in law, his overall background, his integrity etc.
[Para 92]
Duty and Responsibility—Explained.
[Para 94 to 97]
Unlawful Detention
Award of compensation—Power of constitutional court—In cases where there can be no dispute of facts, the constitutional courts have the power to award compensation in case a person has been deprived of his life and liberty without following the procedure established by law.
[Para 84]