Hero Image

Gujarat HC quashes death sentence, orders retrial in double murder case

AHMEDABAD: For the second time in just a month, the Gujarat high court on Monday quashed a death sentence and sent the case back to a sessions court for a fresh trial after the sanity of the accused has been ascertained.


This time, the HC tore into the free legal aid system, because inexperienced lawyers are fielded to defend poor accused persons in serious cases.

The HC termed this a “farce” and called for senior and experienced lawyers to be engaged. It said, “The court has a primary duty to come to the aid of such accused persons by putting timely and useful questions and warning advocates from treading on dangerous grounds”.

Last year, a sessions court at Gandhidham in Kutch district condemned 19-year-old Manju Kunvariya to death for killing her mother, Rajiben, sister Arti and injuring another sister, Mathu, on February 17, 2017 night. The court and the investigating officer never bothered to verify whether Manju was of sound mind to stand trial.

During the hearing on Manju’s appeal against the capital punishment awarded and the government’s request to confirm her death sentence, the bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice A C Rao felt that Manju was mentally unstable and the lower court had tried her without following the mandatory procedures stipulated in Section 329 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), to find whether she was able to defend herself.

The same bench last month did the same in a case involving one Nagjiji Thakor from Mehsana. In this case, Manju was defended at her trial in Gandhidham by an advocate provided by the Legal Service Authority. The HC said the legal aid being provided “is just for name’s sake”. The legal aid is nothing but a farce. The panel of lawyers prepared for the purpose of legal aid is not a platform to provide training to young lawyers or give them an opportunity to gain experience in conducting sessions cases”.

The HC further said, “The cross-examination of witnesses in a serious offence like murder is not child’s play. It is very unfortunate to note that in the case at hand, there was practically no cross-examination. There is not just one such case at hand. We have come across so many appeals in which there is no cross-examination worth the name by the defence counsel appointed by the Legal Services Authority.”

The HC requested senior criminal lawyers across the state to extend their services to poor persons accused in serious cases. Sessions judges have been ordered to make sure that experienced criminal lawyers are provided in such cases and to make the state pay for their proper remuneration.

READ ON APP