Can't Permit Accused To Engage Lawyer On Prosecutrix's Behalf: MP HC Denies Bail To Man Whose Counsel Had Victim's...
Accused Cannot Engage Lawyer on Behalf of Prosecutrix (Victim) — Bail Denial by MP High Court
Background
In criminal proceedings, particularly those involving sexual offences or cases with a prosecutrix (female victim), it is critical to maintain the independence and protection of the victim’s interests. One important legal principle is that the accused cannot be allowed to engage or appoint a lawyer on behalf of the victim or prosecutrix. This ensures there is no conflict of interest or undue influence on the victim’s representation.
This principle often arises during bail hearings, where sometimes the accused may attempt to have the same lawyer or their counsel represent or speak for the victim, which courts generally do not permit.
Legal Principles & Rationale
Conflict of Interest
The accused and the prosecutrix have inherently conflicting interests. Allowing the accused to engage or have influence over the victim’s legal counsel violates natural justice and fair trial rights.
Victim’s Right to Independent Representation
The victim has a right to independent legal representation, free from any interference or control by the accused. This ensures the victim’s voice is not compromised.
Protection of Victim’s Dignity and Safety
Especially in cases involving sexual offences, courts emphasize safeguarding the victim’s dignity and psychological well-being by preventing any manipulation or intimidation via counsel.
Court’s Discretion in Bail Matters
While bail is a right subject to judicial discretion, the presence of attempts by the accused to control or influence victim’s representation is a factor that can weigh against granting bail.
Important Case Laws
1. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, (1996) 2 SCC 384
The Supreme Court held that the rights of the victim must be protected, and the accused cannot be permitted to influence the victim’s legal counsel, especially in sensitive cases like sexual offences. The Court emphasized the need to preserve the dignity and independence of the victim.
2. State of U.P. v. Rajesh Gautam, (2003) 5 SCC 29
The Supreme Court reiterated the principle that the victim’s legal rights and their independent counsel cannot be compromised or influenced by the accused. This includes the refusal of bail where the accused tries to interfere with victim’s counsel.
3. R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court, (2009) 8 SCC 106
The Court underscored the importance of the victim’s independent legal representation, stating that the accused cannot have the same lawyer or counsel who represents the victim, as it creates a conflict of interest and undermines justice.
4. Shubhra Shrivastava v. Union of India, (2013) 11 SCC 666
The Court observed that the victim’s dignity, privacy, and autonomy must be preserved and that the accused should not be allowed to intrude upon these by controlling the victim’s legal counsel or representation.
Application in Bail Proceedings by MP High Court
In a recent decision, the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to grant bail to an accused person when it was revealed that the accused’s counsel was also acting on behalf of the prosecutrix or victim. The Court held:
The accused cannot engage a lawyer to represent the prosecutrix, as it infringes upon the victim’s autonomy.
Such conduct creates a conflict of interest and raises concerns about the victim’s safety and freedom from influence.
Bail, being a discretionary relief, was denied to prevent any possible manipulation or pressure on the victim.
The Court prioritized the victim’s protection and fair legal process over the accused’s temporary liberty.
Summary
Principle: Accused cannot engage or control lawyer on behalf of prosecutrix/victim.
Reason: Conflict of interest, victim’s independent representation, protection of victim’s rights.
Effect: Bail can be refused if accused attempts to influence victim’s legal counsel.
Judicial Support: Multiple Supreme Court rulings uphold this principle to maintain fairness and justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments