Published on: October 14, 2023 at 13:25 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi V. State of Gujarat (2023)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that if the Criminal Court is presented with the identical evidence describing the similar role then the Court cannot convict one accused and acquit the other. It is held that such Doctrine of Parity is envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guarantees protection of the rights of equal treatment of the accused with due process of the law.
15. When there is similar or identical evidence of eyewitnesses against two accused by ascribing them the same or similar role, the Court cannot convict one accused and acquit the other. In such a case, the cases of both the accused will be governed by the principle of parity.
This principle means that the Criminal Court should decide like cases alike, and in such cases, the Court cannot make a distinction between the two accused, which will amount to discrimination.
19. We have found that the case of accused no 2 stands on the same footing as accused nos. 1, 5 and 13 acquitted by this Court. The accused no. 2 must get the benefit of parity.
The principles laid down in the case of Harbans Singh will apply. If we fail to grant relief to accused no 2, the rights guaranteed to accused no. 2 under Article 21 of the Constitution of India will be violated. It will amount to doing manifest injustice.
In fact, as a Constitutional Court entrusted with the duty of upholding fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution, it is our duty and obligation to extend the same relief to accused no. 2. Therefore, we will have to recall the order passed in the special leave petition filed by accused no. 2.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
