Relief For Litigants As Allahabad HC Suspends Rs 500 Charge For Photo Identification
Background
In certain criminal proceedings, courts require photo identification parades to establish the identity of accused persons or witnesses. Traditionally, a charge may be levied on the accused or litigants to cover the costs associated with conducting the photo identification, such as arranging photos, security, and administrative expenses.
Recently, the Allahabad High Court suspended a Rs 500 charge imposed for photo identification, recognizing that such charges place an additional financial burden on litigants, many of whom may be economically disadvantaged.
Issue at Hand
Whether courts or police authorities can impose a monetary charge on accused or litigants for conducting photo identification during investigation or trial.
The impact of such charges on the right to a fair trial and access to justice, especially for economically weaker sections.
Allahabad High Court’s Stand
The Allahabad High Court held that:
Imposition of Rs 500 charge is unjustified and arbitrary.
Such charges cannot become a barrier to fair investigation or trial.
The State or government authorities are responsible for conducting photo identification without shifting costs to litigants.
The charge was suspended with immediate effect to relieve litigants of financial burden.
Legal Principles Involved
Right to Fair Trial (Article 21 of the Constitution):
The right to life and personal liberty includes the right to a fair trial. Any cost imposed that restricts access to justice can be challenged.
Access to Justice:
Financial barriers to participation in legal procedures infringe upon fundamental rights.
State’s Responsibility:
The State is obligated to provide the machinery and resources for investigation, including photo identification, without imposing costs on the accused or litigants.
Relevant Case Law
1. Kharak Singh v. State of UP (1963) 1 SCR 332
The Supreme Court held that the right to life includes right to fair procedure and safeguards against arbitrary state action.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248
Emphasized that procedure established by law must be fair, just, and reasonable.
Any financial burden that denies effective legal remedy violates Article 21.
3. State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh (1999) 8 SCC 392
Affirmed that the State must provide facilities necessary for investigation and trial.
4. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
Laid down guidelines for fair treatment of accused during investigation, including protections during identification procedures.
5. All India Federation of Democratic Youth v. Union of India (2019) 15 SCC 541
Court held that financial hurdles cannot block access to justice and due process.
Reasoning Behind Suspension of Rs 500 Charge
Economic Hardship: Many accused persons come from economically weaker sections unable to pay the charge.
Access to Justice: Imposing fees restricts poor litigants' ability to participate fully in the justice system.
Non-Statutory Charge: No statutory authority exists for levying such a charge.
Administrative Responsibility: The cost of photo identification is a part of the State's responsibility in criminal justice administration.
Impact of Allahabad HC’s Order
Immediate relief to accused persons and litigants by removing the financial barrier.
Reinforces the principle that justice must be accessible and affordable.
Sends a message that criminal justice procedures cannot be commercialized.
Encourages other courts to review similar charges or costs imposed.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court suspended the Rs 500 charge imposed for photo identification during criminal investigations/trials, recognizing that such charges violate the constitutional right to a fair trial and access to justice. The State must bear the cost of such procedures, and litigants should not be burdened financially.
RELATED Blog
0 comments