Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Madhav Hayawadanrao Hoskot v. State Of Maharashtra
AIR 1978 SC 1548, [1978] 3 SCC 544
JUDGES: V.R. Krishna Iyer, D.A. Desai and O. Chinnappa Reddy
Date of Decision: 17-08-1978
FACTS:-
In brief, the petitioner, a young reader of university claims to hold Ph.D. degree, was alleged to commit offence of forgery and counterfeit the degree certificates of the university. The clever shopkeeper where an order to prepare an embossing seal was placed by the petitioner gave pre-emptive information to the police. The sessions court held petitioner guilty under S.417, 467, 468, 471 and 511 of IPC but sentenced him with simple imprisonment for this grave offence on the ground of his fine and career background. Later, High Court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against the conviction and allowed the appeal of the state to enhance the sentence. The petition filed for special leave to appeal after four years whereby he already undergone his full term of imprisonment; against this heavy sentence. The apex court was not impressed with the merits of the case as more disturbed over the explanation offered for the delay of four years in filing special leave petition.
ISSUE:-
Whether right to free legal aid to prisoners are guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution?
JUDGMENT:-
The Apex Court surprised to have this petition after four years of the judgment of the High Court whereby the petitioner had already undergone his full term of imprisonment. To begin with it was contented by the petitioner that the High Court made delayed in providing the free copy of its judgment. Further, he disclosed that the copy was not duly served by the prison officials and there is nothing in record that bears his signature which acknowledges its receipt. Although, prison officials denied such allegation saying that free copy was served to the petitioner but took it back of the purpose of enclosing it with a mercy petition for remission of sentence. Thus, the prisoners are situationally at the mercy of the prison ‘brass’ but their right to appeal remains under peril in absence of any statutory provision to provide free legal aid.
The Court has relied upon the decision in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [(1978) 1 SCR 621] case which explains that the personal liberty cannot be cut out or cut down without fair legal procedure. If prisoner sentenced to imprisonment is unable to exercise his statutory right of appeal then there is implicit in the Constitution under Article 142 read with Articles 21 and 39A, power to assign counsel for such imprisoned person for doing complete justice. This is a necessary incident of the right of appeal conferred under S.363 and allowed by Article 136 of the Constitution. In the present case, the legal counsel was provided by the court but the petitioner preferred to argue himself. The court upholds his right to counsel under Article 21 in directional sense.
Practically, it a duty of the state government to provide remuneration to the assigned counsel as fixed by the court and cannot denial such right on the ground of financial difficulty. Of course, the court has to observed the situation from all angles, circumstances and gravity of the sentence, whether it is necessary for the end of justice to make available legal aid in a particular case.
This petition was closed with series of directions to the states to issue instructions to its officials and the jail authorities to promptly make available to prisoners free copies of judgments, inform them of their right to avail of legal aid and provide them with effective assistance in applying for and obtaining legal aid for pursuing cases before court.
HELD:-
Thus, it has been held that right to free legal aid is an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure guaranteed under Article 21 for an accused sentenced to imprisonment and courts will always furnish a free copy of the judgment when sentencing an accused and jail officials will assist prisoner in exercising his right to appeal or revision.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
