Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Anopbhai Punambhai Bhoi on 16 July, 2021
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani, Rajendra M. Sareen
R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5289 of 2020
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 448 of 2020
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ANOPBHAI PUNAMBHAI BHOI
==========================================================
Appearance:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
Date : 16/07/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)
1. This is an application on the part of the State seeking Special Leave to prefer an appeal. We have noticed that the opponent Nos.2, 3 and 4 have been duly served, the statements have been recorded by the A.S.I., wherein they have categorically made a request for the Legal Aid. We have noticed the endorsement of the Assistant Registrar dated 17.07.2020 and also of some other officials which cannot be deciphered.
2. The noting indicates that the opponents want Legal Aid at the Government cost; however, they have not attached any income certificate. We need to remind the Registry that the Legal Aid is to be provided to the accused as of right and for which the income of the accused is not to be insisted for.
2.1 In case of Sheela Barse vs State Of Maharashtra, reported in (1995) 5 SCC 654 the Apex Court has held that soon after the arrest of an accused, Page 1 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 the nearest Legal Aid Committee shall be contacted by the police to ensure providing of the Legal Aid to the accused. In case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors vs Home Secretary, State Of Bihar, reported in (1981) SCC 98 the Apex Court has spoken of the free legal Aid to the accused for the same being his constitutional right. It was the case of several under trials prisoners including women and children, who were imprisoned in Bihar awaiting the trial for years and a petition for habeas corpus was filed on behalf some of them by a Supreme Court's advocate. In such circumstances, the Court held that such imprisonment of under trial is a denial of human rights and withholding basic sidles. It has spoken of speedy trial and by broadening the content of Article 21 held that it is a fundamental right implicit in Article 21. The Court has amplified how there is need for a Legal Aid for these detenues.
3. In case of Khatri & Ors. (I) vs State Of Bihar & Ors, reported in (1981) 1 SCC 623 which was the case of 17 under trial prisoners in the Central Jail of Bhagalpur having complaint of their being deprived of their eye sides by the police in the police custody, where also referring to the decision of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors (supra) the Apex Court directed the State to inform the Court regarding providing of legal representation to this under trials prisioners and in case of Khatri & Ors. (II) vs State Of Bihar & Ors, reported in (1981) 1 SCC 627 the Court held that right to free legal services is an Page 2 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held implicit in the guarantee of Article 21 and the State is under a constitutional mandate to provide a lawyer to an accused person, if the circumstances of the case and the needs of justice so require. Provided of course the accused person does not object to the provision of such lawyer. This constitutional obligation of the State is not only limited to the stage of trial, but also extends to the stage when the accused is first produced before the magistrate as also when he is remanded from time to time. The State cannot avoid this obligation by pleading financial or administrative inability or that none of the aggrieved prisoners asked for any Legal Aid at the expense of the State. The Magistrate and Sessions Judges in the country must inform every accused, who appears before them and who is not represented by a lawyer on account of his poverty or indigence that he is entitled to free legal services at the cost of the State. Every State in the country must make provision for grant of free legal services to an accused, who is unable to engage a lawyer.
3.1 It would be profitable to reproduce the relevant paragraphs of the decision of Khatri & Ors. (II) (supra), which are as follow:
"5. That takes us to one other important issue which arises in this case. It is clear from the particulars supplied by the State from the records of the various judicial Page 3 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 magistrates dealing with the blinded prisoners from time to time that, neither at the time when the blinded prisoners were produced for the first time before the judicial magistrate nor at the time when the remand orders were passed, was any legal representation available to most of the blinded prisoners. The records of the judicial magistrates show that no legal representation was provided to the blinded prisoners, because none of them asked for it nor did the judicial magistrates enquire from the blinded prisoners produced before them either initially or at the time of remand whether they wanted any legal representation at State cost. The only excuse for not providing legal representation to the blinded prisoners at the cost of the State was that none of the blinded prisoners asked for it. The result was that barring two or three blinded prisoners who managed to get a lawyer to represent them at the later stages of remand, most of the blinded prisoners were not represented by any lawyers and save a few who were released on bail, and that too after being in jail for quite some time, the rest of them continued to languish in jail. It is difficult to understand how this state of affairs could be permitted to continue despite the decision of this Court in Hussainara Khatonn's case. This Court has pointed out in Hussainara Khatoon's case (supra) which was decided as far back as 9th March, 1979 that the right to free legal services is clearly an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held implicit in the guarantee of Article 21 and the State is under a constitutional mandate to provide a lawyer to an accused person if the circumstances of the case and the Page 4 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 needs of justice so require, provided of course the accused person does not object to the provision of such lawyer. It is unfortunate that though this Court declared the right to legal aid as a Fundamental Right of an accused person by a process of judicial construction of Article 21, most of the States in the country have not taken note of this decision and provided free legal services to a person accused of an offence. We regret this disregard of the decision of the highest court in the land by many of the States despite the constitutional declaration in Article 141 that the law declared by this Court shall be binding through-out the territory of India. Mr. K. G. Bhagat on behalf of the State agreed that in view of the decision of this Court the State was bound to provide free legal services to an indigent accused but he suggested that the State might find it difficulty to do so owing to financial constraints. We may point out to the State of Bihar that it cannot avoid its constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to a poor accused by pleading financial or administrative inability. The State is under a constitutional mandate to provide free legal aid to an accused person who is unable to secure legal services on account of indigenous and whatever is necessary for his purpose has to be done by the State. The State may have its financial constraints and its priorities in expenditure but, as pointed out by the court in Rhem v. Malcolm. "The law does not permit any Government to deprive its citizens of constitutional rights on a plea of poverty" and to quote the words of Justice Blackmum in Jackson vs. Bishop, 404 F. Supp. 2d, 571:
"humane considerations and constitutional requirements are not in this day to be measured by dollar considerations."Page 5 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021
R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 Moreover, this constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to an indigent accused does not arise only when the trial commences but also attaches when the accused is for the first time produced before the magistrate. It is elementary that the jeopardy to his personal liberty arises as soon as a person is arrested and produced before a magistrate, for it is at that stage that he gets the first opportunity to apply for bail and obtain his release as also to resist remand to police or jail custody. That is the stage at which an accused person needs competent legal advice and representation and no procedure can be said to be reasonable, fair and just which denies legal advice and representation to him at this stage. We must, therefore, hold that the State is under a constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to an indigent accused not only at the stage of trial but also at the stage when he is first produced before the magistrate as also when he is remanded from time to time.
6. But even this right to free legal services would be illusory for an indigent accused unless the magistrate or the Sessions Judge before whom he is produced informs him of such right. It is common knowledge that about 70 per cent of the people in the rural areas are illiterate and even more than that percentage of people are not aware of the rights conferred upon them by law. There is so much lack of legal awareness that it has always been recognised as one of the principal items of the programme of the legal aid movement in this country to promote legal literacy. It would make a mockery of legal aid if it were to be left to a poor ignorant and illiterate accused to ask Page 6 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 for free legal services. Legal aid would become merely a paper promise and it would fail of its purpose. The magistrate or the sessions judge before whom the accused appears must be held to be under an obligation to inform the accused that if he is unable to engage the services of a lawyer on account of poverty or indigence, he is entitled to obtain free legal services at the cost of the State. Unfortunately, the judicial magistrates failed to discharge this obligation in the case of the blinded prisoners and they merely stated that no legal representation was asked for by the blinded prisoners and hence none was provided. We would, therefore, direct the magistrates and Session Judges in the country to inform every accused who appears before them and who is not represented by a lawyer on account of his poverty or indigence that he is entitled to free legal services at the cost of the State. Unless he is not willing to take advantage every other State in the country to make provision for grant of free legal services to an accused who is unable to engage a lawyer on account of reasons such as poverty, indigence or incommunicado situation. The only qualification would be that the offence charged against the accused is such that, on conviction, it would result in a sentence of imprisonment and is of such a nature that the circumstances of the case and the needs of social justice require that he should be given free legal representation. There may be cases involving offences such as economic offences or offences against law prohibiting prostitution or child abuse and the like, where social justice may require that free legal services need not be provided by the State."
Page 7 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021
4. In case of SUK DAS VS. UNION TERRITORY OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH, reported in (1986) 2 SCC 401 the Apex Court has emphasised on the free Legal Aid in criminal trials by saying that it is a fundamental right of an indigent accused to be provided with the Legal Aid and it cannot be denied on his failure to apply for free Legal Aid. It is the Magistrate, who has been obligated to inform every accused, who on conviction is liable to imprisonment, of his right and inquire if he wishes to be represented at State cost, unless refused by the accused the failure to provide legal aid would vitiate the trial according to the Apex Court.
4.1 It would be profitable to reproduce necessary findings and observations of the Apex Court in case of SUK DAS (supra).
"5. It is now well established as a result of the decision of this Court in Hussainara Khatoon's case that:
"the right to free legal service is .... clearly an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held to be implicit in the guarantee of Article 21. This is a constitutional right of every accused person who is unable to engage a lawyer and secure legal services on account of reasons such as poverty, indigence or incommunicado situation and the State is under a mandate to provide a lawyer to an accused person if the circumstances of the case and the needs of justice so require, provided of Page 8 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 course the accused person does not object to the provision of such lawyer".
This Court pointed out that it is an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure to prisoner who is to seek his liberation through the court's process that he should have legal service available to him. The same view was taken by a Bench of this Court earlier in M.H. Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra. It may therefore now be taken as settled law that free legal assistance at State cost is a fundamental right of a person accused of an offence which may involved jeopardy to his life or personal liberty and this fundamental right is implicit in the requirement of reasonable, fair and just procedure prescribed by Article 21. Of course, it must be recognised that there may be cases involving offences, such as economic offences or offences against law prohibiting prostitution or child abuse and the like, where social justice may require that free legal service may not be provided by the State. There can in the circumstances be no doubt that the appellant was entitled to a free legal assistance at State cost when he was placed in peril of their personal liberty by reason of being accused of an offence which is proved would clearly entail imprisonment for a term of two years.
6. But the question is whether this fundamental right could lawfully be denied to the appellant if he did not apply for free legal aid. Is the exercise of this fundamental right conditioned upon the accused applying for free legal assistance so that if he does not make an application for free legal assistance the trial may lawfully proceed without adequate legal representation being afforded to him? Now it Page 9 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 is common knowledge that about 70% of the people living in rural areas are illiterate and even more than that percentage of the people are not aware of the rights conferred upon them by law. Even literate people do not know what are their rights and entitlements under the law. It is this absence of legal awareness which is responsible for the deception, exploitation and deprivation of rights and benefits from which the poor suffer in this land. Their legal needs always stand to become crisis oriented because their ignorance prevents them from anticipating legal troubles and approaching a lawyer for consultation and advise in time and their poverty magnifies the impact of the legal troubles and difficulties when they come. Moreover, because of their ignorance and illiteracy, they cannot become self-reliant: they cannot even help themselves. The law ceases to be their protector because they do not know that they are entitled to the protection of the law and they can avail of the legal service programme for putting an end to their exploitation and winning their rights. The result is that poverty becomes with them a condition of total helplessness. This miserable condition in which the poor finds themselves can be alleviating to some extent by creating legal awareness amongst the poor. That is why it has always been recognised as one of the principal items of the programme of the legal aid movement in the country to promote legal literacy. It would in these circumstances make a mockery of legal aid if it were to be left to a poor ignorant and illiterate accused to ask for free legal services. Legal aid would become merely a paper promise and it would fail of its purpose. This is the reason why in Khatri & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., we ruled that the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge before whom an accused appears must be held to be Page 10 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 under an obligation to inform the accused that if he is unable to engage the services of a lawyer on account of poverty or indigence, he is entitled to obtain free legal services at the cost of the State. We deplored that in that case where the accused were blinded prisoners the Judicial Magistrate failed to discharge oblligation and contented themselves by merely observing that no legal representation had been asked for by the blinded prisoners and hence none was provided. We accordingly directed "the Magistrates and Sessions Judges in the country to inform every accused who appear before them and who is not represented by a lawyer on account of his poverty or indigence that he is entitled to free legal services at the cost of the State" unless he is not willing to take advantage of the free legal services provided by the State. We also gave a general direction to every State in the country "........ to make provision for grant of free legal service to an accused who is unable to engage a lawyer on account of reasons such as poverty, indigence or incommunicado situations," the only qualification being that the offence charged against an accused is such that, on conviction, it would result in a sentence of imprisonment and is of such a nature that the circumstances of the case and that the needs of social justice require that he should be given free legal representations. It is quite possible that since the trial was held before the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner prior to the declaration of the law by this Court in Khatri & Ors. v. State of Bihar (supra), the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner did not infrom the appellant that if he was not in a position to engage a lawyer on account of lack of material resources he was entitled to free legal assistance at State cost nor asked him whether he would like to have free Page 11 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 legal aid. But it is surprising that despite this declaration of the law in Khatri & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. (supra) on 19th December 1980 when the decision was rendered in that case, the High Court persisted in taking the view that since the appellant did not make an application for free legal assistance, no unconstitutionality was involved in not providing him legal representation at State cost. It is obvious that in the present case the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner did not inform the appellant that he was entitled to free legal assistance nor did he inquire from the appellant whether he wanted a lawyer to be provided to them at State cost. The result was that the appellant remained unrepresented by a lawyer and the trial ultimately resulted in his conviction. This was clearly a violation of the fundamental right of the appellant under Article 21 and the trial must accordingly be held to be vitiated on account of a fatal constitutional infirmity, and the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant must be set aside."
5. In case of ANOKHILAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, reported in (2019) 20 SCC 196 the Apex Court by referring to Articles 21 and 39-A has summarised the Principles relating to free Legal Aid and equal justice by holding that the right to free legal services is an essential ingredient of "reasonable, fair and just"
procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held implicit in guarantee of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
5.1 It would be profitable to reproduce relevant findings Page 12 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 and observations of the Apex Court in case of ANOKHILAL (supra).
"11. In Hussainara Khatoon and others (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna6 it was observed as under:
"7. We may also refer to Article 39-A the fundamental constitutional directive which reads as follows:
"39-A. Equal justice and free legal aid.--The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities."
This article also emphasises that free legal service is an unalienable element of "reasonable, fair and just" procedure for without it a person suffering from economic or other disabilities would be deprived of the opportunity for securing justice. The right to free legal services is, therefore, clearly an essential ingredient of "reasonable, fair and just", procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held implicit in the guarantee of Article 21. This is a constitutional right of every accused person who is unable to engage a lawyer and secure legal services on account of reasons such as poverty, indigence or incommunicado situation and the State is under a mandate to provide a lawyer to an accused person if the circumstances of the case and the needs of justice so require, provided of course the accused person does not object to the provision of such Page 13 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 lawyer."
12. The developments in the matter of providing free Legal Aid as translated in various schemes and dealt with in the decisions of this Court, were noted in Rajoo Alias Ramakant v. State of Madhya Pradesh7 as under:
"6. By the Forty-second Amendment to the Constitution, effected in 1977, Article 39-A was inserted. This article provides for free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other manner, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
7. Article 39-A of the Constitution reads as follows:
"39-A. Equal justice and free legal aid.--The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities."
8. Subsequently, with the intention of providing free legal aid, the Central Government resolved (on 26-9- 1980) and appointed the "Committee for Implementing the Legal Aid Schemes". This Committee was to monitor and implement legal aid programs on a uniform basis throughout the country in fulfilment of the constitutional mandate.
Page 14 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021
9. Experience gained from a review of the working of the Committee eventually led to the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short "the Act").
10. The Act provides, inter alia, for the constitution of a National Legal Services Authority, a Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, State Legal Services Authorities as well as Taluk Legal Services Committees. Section 12 of the Act lays down the criteria for providing legal services. It provides, inter alia, that every person who has to file or defend a case shall be entitled to legal services, if he or she is in custody. Section 13 of the Act provides that persons meeting the criteria laid down in Section 12 of the Act will be entitled to legal services provided the authority concerned is satisfied that such person has a prima facie case to prosecute or defend.
11. It is important to note in this context that Sections 12 and 13 of the Act do not make any distinction between the trial stage and the appellate stage for providing legal services. In other words, an eligible person is entitled to legal services at any stage of the proceedings which he or she is prosecuting or defending. In fact the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee provides legal assistance to eligible persons in this Court. This makes it abundantly clear that legal services shall be provided to an eligible person at all stages of the proceedings, trial as well as appellate. It is also important to note that in view of the constitutional mandate of Article 39-A, legal services or legal aid is provided to an eligible person free of cost.
Page 15 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 Decisions of this Court
12. Pending the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, the issue of providing free legal services or free legal aid or free legal representation (all terms being understood as synonymous) came up for consideration before this Court.
13. Among the first few decisions in this regard is Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, In that case, reference was made to Article 39-A of the Constitution and it was held that (SCC p. 105, para 7) free legal service is an inalienable element of "'reasonable, fair and just', procedure for a person accused of an offence and it must be held implicit in the guarantee of Article 21 [of the Constitution]". It was noted that: "This is a constitutional right of every accused person who is unable to engage a lawyer and secure [free] legal services on account of reasons such as poverty, indigence or incommunicado situation." It was held that the State is under a mandate to provide a lawyer to an accused person if the circumstances of the case and the needs of justice so require, subject of course to the accused person not objecting to the providing of a lawyer.
14. The essence of this decision was followed in Khatri and others (II) v. State of Bihar8. In that case, it was noted that the Judicial Magistrate did not provide legal representation to the accused persons because they did not ask for it. This was found to be unacceptable. This Court went further and held that it was the obligation of the Judicial Magistrate Page 16 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 before whom the accused were produced to inform them of their entitlement to legal representation at State cost. In this context, it was observed that the right to free legal services would be illusory unless the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge before whom the accused is produced informs him of this right. It would also make a mockery of legal aid if it were to be left to a poor, ignorant and illiterate accused to ask for free legal services thereby rendering the constitutional mandate a mere paper promise.
15. Suk Das v. Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh reiterated the requirement of providing free and adequate legal representation to an indigent person and a person accused of an offence. In that case, it was reiterated that an accused need not ask for legal assistance--the Court dealing with the case is obliged to inform him or her of the entitlement to free legal aid. This Court observed that (SCC p. 407, para 5) it was now "settled law that free legal assistance at State cost is a fundamental right of a person accused of an offence which may involve jeopardy to his life or personal liberty and this fundamental right is implicit in the requirement of reasonable, fair and just procedure prescribed by Article 21 [of the Constitution]".
16.Since the requirements of law were not met in that case, and in the absence of the accused person being provided with legal representation at State cost, it was held that there was a violation of the fundamental right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution. The trial was Page 17 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 held to be vitiated on account of a fatal constitutional infirmity and the conviction and sentence were set aside.
17.We propose to briefly digress and advert to certain observations made, both in Khatri (2)8 and Suk Das9 In both cases, this Court carved out some exceptions in respect of grant of free legal aid to an accused person. It was observed that: (SCC p. 632, para 6).
'6...There may be cases involving offences such as economic offences or offences against law prohibiting prostitution or child abuse and the like, where social justice may require that free legal services need not be provided by the State."
We have some reservations whether such exceptions can be carved out particularly keeping in mind the constitutional mandate and the universally accepted principle that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. If such exceptions are accepted, there may be a tendency to add some more, such as in cases of terrorism, thereby diluting the constitutional mandate and the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. However, we need not say anything more on this subject since the issue is not before us.
18. The above discussion conclusively shows that this Court has taken a rather proactive role in the matter of providing free legal assistance to persons accused of an offence or convicted of an offence."
6. All these decisions clearly provide that Article 39-A Page 18 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021 R/CR.MA/5289/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2021 brought by way of 42nd amendment to the Constitution of India for free Legal Aid to ensure availing of reasonable, fair and just opportunities to all such persons and the provision of Legal Service Authorities Act, 1987 is for achieving the mandate of Article 39 of the Constitution of India.
7. Noticing these decisions, according to us, there was no requirement for insisting on knowing the proof of financial income of the accused as has been noted by the Registry, if the police is otherwise asked to immediately refer the matter to the nearest Legal Aid Committee way back in case of Sheela Barse (supra), much water has flown, and the way the Apex Court has treated this right of the accused in case of ANOKHILAL (supra) the version of the opponent Nos.2, 3 and 4 ought to have been enough for providing them the Legal Aid.
8. We direct the Secretary, the High Court Legal Service Committee to provide Legal Aid to all the four opponents, within a period of one week. There shall be also intimated directly and also through the concerned police station.
9. The matter is posted for hearing on 02.08.2021.
(SONIA GOKANI, J) (RAJENDRA M. SAREEN,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 19 of 19 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 24 22:32:07 IST 2021