Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2643-2644 OF 2023
(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) Nos. 6854-6855 of 2023)
NIRANJAN DAS @ NIRU DAS @ MAHANTO ... APPELLANT(S)
VS.
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL ... RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
ABHAY S.OKA, J.
Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and the learned senior counsel appearing for
the respondent-State.
3. The present appellant-Niranjan Das was Accused No.2
before the Trial Court. He was convicted by the Trial
Court for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Trial Court convicted the
appellant as well as the Accused No.1-Subodh Rajbanshi.
It is pertinent to note that both of them were convicted
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 1 of 6
simplicitor under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 34
IPC was not applied.
4. Separate appeals were preferred by both the
th
accused. The appeals were heard on 12 May, 2022. In
the impugned judgment delivered on the same day, it is
recorded in the judgment that on the day on which these
appeals were heard, the present appellant-Niranjan Das
was not represented by any advocate. Therefore, the
Division Bench which heard the appeals appointed an
empaneled advocate to espouse the cause of the appellant.
The High Court directed the Secretary of the High Court
Legal Services Authority to regularise the appointment of
the said advocate. It appears that after appointing the
advocate, the Court did not grant time to the advocate to
prepare herself. In the impugned judgment, it is
recorded that the advocate appointed to espouse the cause
of the appellant adopted the arguments made by the
advocate for the co-accused in the other appeal. Another
argument made by the said advocate has been recorded that
it cannot be said that the present appellant shared
common intention with the co-accused to commit the
murder.
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 2 of 6
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent
states that looking to the submissions of the advocate
recorded in the impugned judgment, obviously, the
advocate was ready to argue.
6. This was a case where the appellant was convicted
for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC
and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.
Therefore, it was a duty of the Court to give a
reasonable time to the advocate appointed to go through
the file and get ready to assist the Court. Apart from
adopting the submissions made by the co-accused, it
appears that the advocate appointed to espouse the cause
of the appellant made a submission that the appellant did
not share common intention to commit the murder with the
co-accused. The very fact that such submission is made
shows that the advocate was not ready with the matter, as
there was no conviction of the appellant with the aid of
Section 34 of the IPC. Obviously, the advocate was not
aware that Section 34 of the IPC was not invoked by the
Trial Court and therefore, she has argued as if the
appellant was convicted with the aid of Section 34 of the
IPC. This happened obviously because the appointed
advocate was not given time to prepare herself. There
were 20 prosecution witnesses in this case.
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 3 of 6
7. The object of appointing an advocate to espouse the
cause of the appellant who was unrepresented was to
ensure that justice is done to him. The High Court
decided the appeal on the same day on which the advocate
was appointed. In this case, the advocate appointed to
represent accused was not granted even a reasonable time
to prepare herself. Therefore, the impugned judgment
insofar as relates to the appeal preferred by the
appellant-Niranjan Das is concerned will have to be set
aside and the appeal will have to be remanded to the High
court.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant, on
instructions, states that the appellant will engage his
own advocate and therefore, it is not necessary for the
High Court Legal Services Committee to appoint any
advocate to espouse his cause.
th
9. Hence, we set aside the impugned judgment dated 12
May, 2022 confined to Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2008
filed by the appellant-Niranjan Das and remand the said
appeal to the High Court for fresh consideration.
10. We make it clear that the impugned judgment insofar
as it relates to Criminal Appeal No.642 of 2008 preferred
by Subodh Rajbanshi, is not disturbed.
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 4 of 6
11. The appellant has already undergone incarceration
for a period of more than eight years.
12. Therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail on
appropriate terms and conditions, as may be decided by
the Trial Court.
13. We, accordingly, direct that the appellant-Niranjan
Das shall be produced before the Trial Court within a
period of one week from today so that the Trial Court can
enlarge the appellant-Niranjan Das on bail, pending the
final disposal of the Criminal Appeal before the High
Court.
14. We direct that the advocate appointed by the
appellant shall appear before the roster Bench on Monday,
th
the 20 November, 2023 in the morning session so that the
Bench can fix the appropriate date for hearing. Even the
counsel for the State shall also remain present on that
day.
15. The appeals are partly allowed on the above terms.
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 5 of 6
16. The Trial Court record sent to this shall be
transmitted back to the High Court.
..........................J.
(ABHAY S.OKA)
..........................J.
(PANKAJ MITHAL)
NEW DELHI;
August 29, 2023.
Criminal Appeal @ SLP(Crl.)Nos.6854-6855 of 2023 Page 6 of 6