Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order and states “Liberty of a Citizen cannot be taken away in the Absence of Lawyer”

Must Read

“Dismissal Without Inquiry Is Justified if Employee Did Not Prove Minimum Working Period”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the dispute relating to the termination of an employee without any disciplinary inquiry. Brief facts of the...

“Rape Victim To Be Provided Shelter Due To Media Attention Prohibited Under Section 228A of the IPC”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the petition by a rape victim for rehabilitation as she was social ostracization.  Brief facts of the...

Benefit of Probation Not Excluded by the Provisions of Mandatory Minimum Sentence Under Section 397 of Ipc

This case concerns the dispute regarding the granting of probation on good conduct to the accused under the age...

Supreme Court Asks for the Centre’s Response on PIL Filed Seeking the Formation of a Media Tribunal

The Supreme Court sought responses from the Press Council of India (PCI), News Broadcasters Association (NBA) on a PIL which sought to set up a media tribunal to tackle issues concerning the media like complaints against media, channels, and networks. Media has become like an unruly horse that has to be tamed to express the plea.

Law Student Asked the Supreme Court To Take Suo Moto Cognizance of the Violent Farmer Protests

A law student of Mumbai University, Ashish Rai has asked the Supreme Court to take Suo Moto Cognizance of the insult to the national flag done by the farmer protests at the Red Fort. In the course of the farmer's tractor rally on Tuesday, some of the protesters unfurled their own flags by entering the premises of the Red Fort.

Farmers Meeting With the Supreme Court Committee Postponed To Jan 29 Due To the Traffic Restrictions

Due to the traffic restrictions after the violent protests broke out on Republic Day, the meeting of farmers with the Supreme Court Committee that was supposed to take place today was postponed to 29th January.

Follow us

In the case of Parveen v. State of Haryana, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that “a citizen’s liberty cannot be taken away”. This observation was taken while setting aside the order of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, dismissing the plea of a man when his counsel was absent for the hearing.

Facts of the Case

The Appellant had to suffer three years of simple imprisonment via a judgement dated 12 January 2015 as he was convicted under section 25 of the Arms Act by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rohtak. 

However, the judgment dated 12 January 2015 was challenged before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak. The Appellant was granted bail during the pendency of the appeal, but this appeal was dismissed and the conviction was upheld by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak on 10 July 2017.

Further, a revision was filed against the order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak by the Appellant through Legal Services Authority, Rohtak. Since the revision was pending, the Appellant was granted bail on 16 April 2018 by the High Court, however, on 11 February 2020, the revision was dismissed by the Hon’ble court.

Aggrieved by the order of the High Court, the Appellant filed a Criminal Appeal through Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Petitioner’s Submission

It was submitted that the High Court had dismissed the Appellants appeal on 11 February 2020 because of the absence of his advocate. The learned High Court observed that the matter was taken up six times, but the majority of the times no one appeared before the court. The Court stated ‘it seems that neither the petitioner nor the counsel is interested in pursuing this revision’. However, the court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to issue a warrant to arrest the petitioner and let him complete his remaining sentence. 

Further, the application for restoration was also dismissed by the learned court dated 16 July 2020 on the basis that no ground for the restoration has been established. 

Supreme Court’s Observation

After scrutinizing the submissions of the counsels, the Supreme Court was of the view that “Since the revision before the High Court emerged out of a request for the conviction under the Arms Act, the High Court should have designated Amicus Curiae without counsel, who has been locked in by the Legal Services Authority, Rohtak. The freedom of a citizen can’t be removed as such.”

Court’s Decision

In its order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned orders of the High Court dated 11 February and 16 July. Further, while restoring the files of the High Court, the court ordered that during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition the Appellant was admitted to bail by this court and he was on bail during the pendency of the revision before the High Court, the bail will continue in operation till the revision gets disposed of by the High Court. The Appellant was also directed to cooperate in the process of the disposal of the revision. 

Click here to view the original judgement


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

“Dismissal Without Inquiry Is Justified if Employee Did Not Prove Minimum Working Period”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the dispute relating to the termination of an employee without any disciplinary inquiry. Brief facts of the case The Respondent, Smt. Sureshwati was...

“Rape Victim To Be Provided Shelter Due To Media Attention Prohibited Under Section 228A of the IPC”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the petition by a rape victim for rehabilitation as she was social ostracization.  Brief facts of the case In this case, a writ...

Benefit of Probation Not Excluded by the Provisions of Mandatory Minimum Sentence Under Section 397 of Ipc

This case concerns the dispute regarding the granting of probation on good conduct to the accused under the age of twenty-one years.   Brief facts of...

Supreme Court Asks for the Centre’s Response on PIL Filed Seeking the Formation of a Media Tribunal

The Supreme Court sought responses from the Press Council of India (PCI), News Broadcasters Association (NBA) on a PIL which sought to set up a media tribunal to tackle issues concerning the media like complaints against media, channels, and networks. Media has become like an unruly horse that has to be tamed to express the plea.

Law Student Asked the Supreme Court To Take Suo Moto Cognizance of the Violent Farmer Protests

A law student of Mumbai University, Ashish Rai has asked the Supreme Court to take Suo Moto Cognizance of the insult to the national flag done by the farmer protests at the Red Fort. In the course of the farmer's tractor rally on Tuesday, some of the protesters unfurled their own flags by entering the premises of the Red Fort.

Farmers Meeting With the Supreme Court Committee Postponed To Jan 29 Due To the Traffic Restrictions

Due to the traffic restrictions after the violent protests broke out on Republic Day, the meeting of farmers with the Supreme Court Committee that was supposed to take place today was postponed to 29th January.

Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC Judgment which said Groping without Skin Contact Not Sexual Assault under POCSO

The National Commission for Women (NCW) has challenged the Bombay High Court judgment where it stated that groping a child’s breasts without any ‘skin-to-skin’ contact will not be considered as sexual assault as defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Supreme Court Classifying Employees Based on Educational Qualifications for Promotion or Appointment Is Neither Violative of Article 14 nor of Article 16

This case concerns the dispute relating to the classification of employees belonging to the homogenous group based on educational qualifications. Brief facts of the case The...

Supreme Court Refuses To Transfer Petitions To Itself Related To ‘Love Jihad’ Filed in Allahabad High Court

On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to entertain the plea which was filed by the UP Government regarding the transfer of all the pleas challenging the ordinance the court passed, from Allahabad High Court to the Supreme Court.

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench Holds That Groping a Girl Without ‘Skin To Skin’ Contact Is Not Sexual Assault

The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court acquitted a man charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and convicted him of a minor offence under IPC stating that there was no direct physical contact.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -