Skip to main content

Every Judge Shall Inform Convict About His Right To Appeal And To Avail Legal Assistance

The Calcutta High Court while hearing MALATI SARDAR VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL recently expressed concern over the “dismal failure in the matter of extending effective legal aid/assistance to convicts”, and made it mandatory for Judges across the State to inform convicts of their right to file an appeal and legal aid while disposing of a case.

The guidelines were issued by Justice Joymalya Bagchi in an Appeal filed by one Ms. Malati Sardar whose appeal took 6 years to reach the Court due to non-appointment of a lawyer on her behalf.

It then issued the following directions:

1. Every Judge while pronouncing a judgment of conviction and sentence shall inform the convict in a language which is understandable to him, his right to prefer appeal against such judgment including his right to avail of legal aid in that regard from the appropriate legal services authority under the Act of 1987. In the event, the appellant expresses his desire to prefer appeal with legal aid, the Judge shall send a free copy of the judgment to the Secretary of the concerned legal services authority attached to the appellate Court for necessary steps in the matter.

2. The aforesaid fact shall be endorsed at the foot of every judgment stating clearly that the right to prefer appeal with legal aid has been duly communicated to the understanding of the convict. Response thereto of the convict shall also be indicated in the body of the judgment.

3. Necessary amendments may be made to Chapter X of the Calcutta High Court Criminal (Subordinate Courts) Rules, 1985 so that such duty is imposed on the trial Judge at the time of delivery of judgment.

4. In addition thereto, Superintendent of the Correctional Home where the convict is received upon conviction shall also communicate to him such right and record his willingness, if any, to prefer appeal with legal aid in the records of the Correctional Home. In the event, the convict desires to prefer appeal with legal aid, the Superintendent of the concerned Correctional Home shall forth remit necessary papers not only to the registry of the appellate Court but also to the Secretary of the concerned legal services authority attached to the said Court for necessary steps in the matter.

5. Secretary of the concerned legal services authority attached to the appellate Court on receipt of the papers from the trial Judge or the Correctional Home authorities, as the case may be, shall immediately but not later than seven days appoint a lawyer from its panel, who has sufficient knowledge and expertise to deal with such cases, to prefer and prosecute the appeal on behalf of the appellant.

6. The lawyer so appointed shall, if necessary, interview the convict in the correctional home, file necessary pleadings in Court and prosecute the appeal in accordance with law. He shall submit quarterly reports to the Secretary of the concerned legal services authority as to steps taken by him and the status of the appeal till its disposal.

7. Registrar General of the High Court is directed to circulate a copy of this order to every judicial officer in the State of West Bengal to ensure that the aforesaid directions are duly complied with. He shall also initiate the procedure for amendment of the Criminal Rules and Orders, as proposed in the direction no (c), by the High Court in accordance with law.

8. Secretary, State Legal Services Authority shall circulate a copy of this order to all the Secretaries of the District and Sub-divisional Legal Services Authorities and give wide publicity to these directions amongst the general public for prompt and effective implementation of such directions.

9. Department is directed to communicate this order to the Director General of Correctional Services, West Bengal, who shall communicate this order to the  Superintendents of all the Correctional Homes in the State of West Bengal for prompt and effective implementation of the directions.”

 Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/every-judge-shall-inform-convict-right-to-appeal-avail-legal-assistance-calcutta-hc-issues-guidelines-read-judgment/

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Dishonour of cheques - Jurisdiction and cause of action explained

In a landmark judgment, Hon'ble Supreme Court went to some length to define the cause of action and jurisdiction of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. While deciding in 2014 STPL(Web) 499 SC 1, Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Hon'ble court said, one of the main issues faced by the court (a) from which stage do we consider a offence under Section 138 to have been caused (b) Where would the jurisdiction of the court lie if the cheque was drawn in city A and presented dishonored in City B ? After discussion on various past decisions, the Hon'ble court finally affirmed, " To sum up: (i) An offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is committed no sooner a cheque drawn by the accused on an account being maintained by him in a bank for discharge of debt/liability is returned unpaid for insufficiency of funds or for the reason that the amount exceeds the arrangement made with the bank. (...
Post a Comment
Read more

Loss of earning capacity, and not percentage of disability, must decide compensation, says HC

While computing compensation claims of accident victims, the victim's loss of earning capacity shall outweigh the percentage/extent of his disability, the Madras high court has felt. Justice R Mahadevan, enhancing the compensation payable to an injured driver by Rs 2 lakh, said: "In cases for compensation, it is not the disability, which is partial or total, alone that matters, it is the loss in earning capacity as a result of accident that is to be considered." R Murali, driver of a mixed concrete vehicle, met with an accident in January 2009 and suffered injuries in hip, right leg and ankle. He claimed loss of 100% earning capacity and sought appropriate compensation along with 12% interest rate. However, as the disability certificate issued by a doctor pegged the percentage of his disability at 60%, the deputy commissioner of labour-II, awarded Rs 3.12 lakh as compensation, by fixing the monthly income at Rs 4,000. Aggrieved by the poor package, Murali filed the...
Post a Comment
Read more

Registrar cannot remove trademark from record without notice to trademark holder

In Kleenage Products (India) Private Limited vs The Registrar of Trade Marks, the petitioner had applied for registration of trademark ‘KLITOLIN’ which was accepted and from 1988 to 2009, the said trademark was renewed multiple times. The trademark was due for renewal on August 21, 2009, but the petitioner failed to tender application for renewal.  It was, thereafter, revealed that the trademark is likely to be removed from the register. The petitioner contended that the Registrar of Trademarks (respondent No.1) also failed to issue the requisite mandatory notice in Form O-3 to him (the registered proprietor) under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Bombay High Court allowed the petition holding that any such removal can only be possible if prior notice, mandatory under Section 25(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1999, has been given Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/removal-registered-trademarks-cant-done-without-giving-prior-notice-registered-proprie...
Post a Comment
Read more