Uttarakhand HC Orders Retrial Of Blind Rape Accused Who Got 20-Yr Jail Term
The Uttarakhand High Court last week set aside the conviction and 20-year jail term awarded to a visually impaired music teacher for allegedly raping minor school students as it noted that the accused was denied a fair trial since case documents were not provided to him in Braille script.
“The failure and omission to furnish the documents in Braille script, which is admittedly the language which the accused is capable of reading, in our considered opinion has vitiated and rendered the trial unfair on account of the inability of the accused to read, comprehend and instruct his counsel,” a bench of Justice G. Narendar and Justice Alok Mahra observed in its order.
The bench specifically emphasised that the state, by denying the documents in an enabling format (braille), seriously prejudiced the accused’s right to a fair Trial as well as his access to justice.
With this, allowing the convict’s appeal, the bench remitted the matter back to the Trial Court for re-trial after furnishing the material in compliance with Section 12 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
Briefly put, it is the prosecution’s case that appellant (Suchit Narang) had raped several students including a 16-year-old blind girl studying at a school run under the institute for visually handicapped persons in 2018.
An FIR was registered against the teacher based on a complaint filed by the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) under Section 354-A IPC and Section 10/9 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
After investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant under Sections 376, 354-A IPC and 3/4, 9/10, 16/17/21 of the POCSO Act, 2012. In January 2024, the Trial Court passed a verdict of guilty and sentenced him to 20 years ‘ imprisonment.
Challenging his conviction, the appellant had moved the HC, wherein the Deputy Advocate General admitted that the case documents were not furnished to the accused in Braille script, and instead, the documents were in Devnagari script.
Terming this to be a ‘deprivation of the right of the accused to a fair trial‘, the bench said that the right of the appellant to understand the charges and the materials against him was compromised in the instant case.
“The failure to provide documents to the accused in a language in which the accused could not read, would definitely scuttle the chances for the accused to instruct and assist his counsel in canvassing the defence on his behalf. The failure to furnish the documents in the language known to the accused would also seriously prejudice the ability of the accused to respond at the time of questioning by the Court in exercise of the powers under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,” the bench remarked as it set aside the conviction and ordered retrial in the matter.
Appellant was represneted by Advocates Manisha Bhandari, Shashwat Sidhant, Dhruv Chandra and Ishita Dhaila
