Allahabad HC Criticizes Convictions of Innocent Accused to Safeguard Career Prospects of Judges

In a strongly-worded judgment, the Allahabad High Court has shed light on a growing concern within the judicial system, highlighting how trial court judges often convict innocent individuals to avoid backlash from higher courts, especially in cases involving heinous crimes. This trend, according to the Court, reflects a troubling reality where judges, fearing harm to their career prospects and criticism from appellate benches, prioritize convictions even in clear cases warranting acquittal. This practice, the Court stated, not only undermines the justice system but severely impacts those wrongfully accused and their families, as they undergo prolonged trauma and struggle to reintegrate into society post-acquittal.

The Court lamented the government’s disregard for the Law Commission’s 277th Report on Wrongful Prosecution (Miscarriage of Justice): Legal Remedies—a crucial document proposing reforms for compensating those wrongfully prosecuted. The report advocates for a statutory framework enabling both monetary and non-monetary relief to victims of wrongful convictions and places accountability on the State. Despite these recommendations, the government has yet to implement any measures, leading to violations of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and the right to life and personal liberty.

Calling for robust reforms, the Court pointed out that even the recent Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, does not address the plight of wrongfully accused individuals. The judgment delves into the irremediable harm suffered by these individuals, whose lives are permanently affected by wrongful incarceration. The Court emphasized the urgency for a legal provision empowering acquitting courts to award swift compensation to the innocent. This verdict comes as a vital call for judicial and legislative reflection on safeguarding the rights of citizens against wrongful convictions and ensuring that the justice system serves both fairness and accountability.

Detailed Analysis

Fear of Higher Courts Influencing Decisions

• The High Court observed that trial judges, particularly in cases of heinous crimes, often opt for conviction rather than acquittal, influenced by a desire to safeguard their careers from adverse observations by higher courts.
• The Court noted: “A virtual death occurs to the personhood of the individual arraigned in the process, making it impossible for him to come back to ordinary life with an order of acquittal.”

Law Commission’s Recommendations Overlooked

• The Court lamented the government’s inaction on the Law Commission’s 277th Report (2018), which proposed a statutory framework to address wrongful prosecutions.
• The recommendations included monetary and non-monetary compensation such as counselling, mental health services, and vocational development.
• The report also emphasized the State’s duty to compensate victims of wrongful prosecution, holding erring officers accountable.

Violation of Constitutional Rights

• Highlighting the violations of Articles 14 and 21 (equality before the law and right to life and personal liberty) for wrongfully prosecuted individuals, the Court warned that these injustices would persist without systemic changes.
• The Court remarked that even the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lacks adequate provisions aligned with Articles 14 and 21 to address wrongful prosecution.

Irreparable Harm to Wrongfully Prosecuted Individuals

• In its 27-page judgment, the Court illustrated the profound impact of wrongful prosecution, noting that families suffer immensely during prolonged legal battles.
• It stated: “The family of such persons also goes through the time and money-consuming process of contesting trial, which is so tedious that it itself is not less than a major punishment.”
• Such individuals often return to broken families and displaced roles within their communities after years of imprisonment.

Recommendation for Compensation and Empowerment of Courts

• The Court suggested an empowering clause allowing trial, appellate, or revisional courts to grant compensation to the wrongfully convicted.
• Drawing comparisons with Sections 357 and 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which provide for victim compensation, the Court emphasized a streamlined, speedy compensation process for acquitted individuals.
• The Court remarked: “The justice delivery system takes little pains to make amends.” and called for practical measures allowing compensation claims to be resolved at the court of acquittal.

Role of Culpable Conduct in Wrongful Prosecution

• The bench highlighted how Chapters IX and XI of the Indian Penal Code provide guidelines for addressing wrongful prosecution through criminal proceedings.
• Errant state officials and malicious complainants can be held accountable, potentially facing criminal charges for their roles in wrongful convictions.

Case Background and Court’s Verdict

• The High Court issued these observations while acquitting Upendra @ Balveer, previously convicted in a murder case.
• Notably, the trial court had altered charges post-recording of the accused’s statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a procedural lapse noted by the High Court.
• Despite the lack of witness support for the prosecution’s case, the accused had spent 13 years in incarcerationbefore securing bail in October 2022.

Case: Upendra @ Balveer vs. State of U.P.