Right Of Accused To Adduce All Evidence Is Part Of Fair Procedure, Refusal To Summon Defence
⚖️ "Right of Accused to Adduce All Evidence is Part of Fair Procedure" – Refusal to Summon Defence Witnesses Violates Fair Trial
🔍 1. What does the principle mean?
In a criminal trial, every accused has the right to present their full defence. This includes:
Bringing oral and documentary evidence
Summoning witnesses to support their version
Challenging the prosecution’s case through evidence
If the court refuses to allow the accused to summon defence witnesses without strong legal justification, it violates the principle of a fair trial, which is a component of Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life and personal liberty).
🧑⚖️ 2. Why is this right important?
A criminal trial is not one-sided. Both the prosecution and the accused must be allowed equal opportunity to present their case.
If the court allows the prosecution to present witnesses but denies the accused a similar opportunity, the trial becomes imbalanced and biased.
This would violate natural justice and render the entire process unfair.
📚 3. Case Law Principle (No external citations)
Courts across India have consistently held that:
“The accused has a fundamental right to lead evidence in his defence, and any denial of that right—especially refusal to summon relevant witnesses—strikes at the heart of a fair trial.”
For instance, in several criminal appeals, higher courts have set aside convictions because the trial court:
Rejected applications for summoning witnesses without proper reasoning
Dismissed defence evidence as irrelevant without considering its possible impact
Did not provide the accused adequate time or opportunity to bring witnesses
📌 4. When can summoning of defence witnesses be refused?
The court can decline a defence witness only when:
The witness is clearly irrelevant
The request is made with mala fide intent (e.g., just to delay the trial)
The accused has already closed their evidence and wants to reopen without good cause
But even then, the court must record clear reasons in the order. A vague or mechanical rejection is illegal.
🧾 5. Illustrative Example
Let’s say:
An accused is charged with theft.
During trial, he claims he was out of town at the time of the incident.
He files an application to summon hotel staff and CCTV footage from another city to prove alibi.
If the court refuses the application without considering its relevance, or says it will “delay proceedings,” that is a violation of fair trial.
Why? Because this evidence could potentially prove the accused’s innocence.
🔐 6. Constitutional Angle
Article 21 guarantees a right to life and personal liberty.
This includes a right to fair procedure, which covers:
Being heard
Presenting evidence
Having equal opportunity in court
So, denying the accused the right to produce evidence violates this fundamental right.
📋 7. Summary Table
| Legal Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Right to adduce evidence | Accused can present full defence, including summoning witnesses |
| Part of fair trial | Protected under Article 21 of Constitution |
| Court's duty | Must allow defence evidence unless irrelevant or mala fide |
| Wrongful refusal | Leads to violation of natural justice, possible retrial or acquittal |
| Exception | Delay or abuse of process – but reasons must be recorded clearly |
✅ Conclusion
The refusal to summon defence witnesses without valid justification is a serious procedural error that undermines the fairness of the trial. Courts must be careful to protect the accused’s right to defend himself, and a fair trial demands equal opportunity for both sides to present their evidence.
RELATED Blog
0 comments