Google Play App Store

Legal NewsNews Legal BlogsLaw Blogs Branding BlogsJudgements Branding BlogsBranding Blogs All Legal News and BlogsAll Blogs Legal JobsLegal Jobs

What Rights Does An Accused Have During Trial? What Rights Does An Accused Have During Trial?

Bronze medal Reporter Names Posted 18 Nov 2020
What Rights Does An Accused Have During Trial?

When a person who is an accused in a crime or arrested in relation to a crime, undergoes court trial but the accused is innocent until proved guilty. Even they are provided with certain rights when going through a criminal trial.

First of all, the accused has the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty. The guilt is proven or established by evidence or on the ground of the witness statements. Also, this is known that until the guilt of the accused is proven, till then the accused is innocent.

When evidence and statements of witnesses are given in court, accused has the right to be there at that time when the trial is happening. Be the evidence presented in court or the testimonies given by witnesses during the criminal trial, accused has the right to be present there. This right of the accused is given in Section 273, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accused also has the right to get the copies of the documents presented in court in relation to the case in which the person has been arrested and is accused. These copies are that of those documents filed before the court by the prosecution in that particular case.

An accused person undergoing trial has the right to cross-examine the witness/ witnesses of the opposite party.

In the case: Brahmachari Ajitananda v. Anath Bandhu Dutt And Anr. – the Calcutta High Court observed:

Now as far as I can see the accused in a warrant case has no right to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses until after the charge has been framed. The Magistrate may in his discretion allow him to do so, and probably if the accused requested would allow him to do so but the accused cannot claim as of right to cross-examine until the charge has been framed. Section 138, Evidence Act, on which the prosecution rely deals not with the rights of the party but only provides the order in which the proceedings are to be conducted: see the case of -- 'Ashirbad Muchi v. Maju Muchini, (A), where it was held that the Magistrate should give the accused an opportunity to cross-examine even though the charge may not be framed. But that is not the same as saying that the Court must give him an opportunity. No doubt Section 256 does not prohibit cross-examination at a previous stage but that is not the same as saying that the accused has any right to cross-examine. I am of opinion that until the stage of the case provided for in Section 256 is reached the accused has no right to cross-examine. That being so in the present case tha accused had no right to cross-examine and so the evidence of Mr. Milne is not admissible in evidence under Section 33." Further details in this regard would be obtained from Lawyers in India.

Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, [email protected]

Copyright @ Pathmpor Consultants Pvt Ltd