Death penalty set aside due to denial of fair trial

Taking serious note of a case where an accused awarded death penalty was “deprived of effective defence” by the trial court, the Bombay high court has set aside the conviction and sentence.  When the state-appointed lawyer remained absent during cross-examination of four crucial witnesses in the case, the trial judge made the accused — a  labourer —  do it.

“We have perused the entire proceedings of the appeal and we found that this is the true state of affairs,” said a division bench of justices VK Tahilramani and ML Tahaliyani of the Nagpur bench on March 24. “Right of a person, charged with a crime, to get services of a counsel is essential to a fair trial in our country. In the present case, it is noticed that the accused, as far as crucial witnesses are concerned, has remained unrepresented,” said justice Tahilramani.  “The accused is a poor labourer. In such case, calling upon the accused to cross-examine the crucial witnesses in a case where death sentence is envisaged, would be not be fair,’ the judges stated.

The judges were hearing a confirmation of death sentence awarded on September 29, 2010 by the additional sessions judge, Nagpur to labourer Vasanta Dupare, 47, and also Dupare’s appeal.  Dupare had raped and murdered a girl and he was awarded death sentence under section 302, rigorous imprisonment.

His lawyer RP Joshi argued that since he could not afford a lawyer, the state appointed one, Virsen, from the Legal Aid Panel. At the time of cross-examination, Virsen remained absent and Dupare was called upon to cross-examine them. The judges concluded that the trial was clearly vitiated on account of this infirmity and therefore conviction and sentence recorded against the accused was set aside.