Kerala HC: Right to Fair Trial Compromised if Guilt Plea Persists After Charge Alteration

Kerala HC Law Insider

LI Network

Published on: February 8, 2024 at 12:30 IST

The Kerala High Court has emphasized that the right to a fair trial for an accused is jeopardized when a plea of guilt persists after the alteration of charges.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, sitting as a single judge, clarified that if an accused admits guilt to specific offenses, that plea cannot automatically extend to new charges introduced through a change in the charges.

In this case, the petitioner, involved in a motor accident, initially pleaded guilty to offenses under sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) but not under section 304A IPC. However, as the charge was altered to section 304A IPC, the court noted that maintaining the plea of guilt could prejudice the petitioner’s defense.

The Court stressed that the plea of guilt and the resulting conviction should not be a mere formality but strictly adhere to proper procedure. In this instance, the petitioner’s guilty plea was made for offenses under sections 279 and 338 IPC, not section 304A IPC.

The Court highlighted that the situation would have been different had the accused been informed that the charge also included section 304A IPC.

The petitioner sought to set aside a lower court’s conviction under Sections 279 and 338 IPC, arguing that he was compelled by the police to plead guilty without understanding the implications, as he did not speak or comprehend Malayalam.

After the conviction, the petitioner received a summons notifying him of the alteration of charges to Section 304A IPC, following the demise of the injured party in the accident.

Referring to the guidelines set out in the case of Raseen Babu v. State of Kerala, the Court deemed the plea of guilt for offenses under Sections 279 and 338 IPC as not voluntary.

The Court emphasized that allowing the guilty plea to persist despite the charge alteration would compromise the petitioner’s right to a fair trial, deeming such a procedure unjust and unfair.

Consequently, the court set aside the convictions, asserting that the petitioner has the right to contest the matter on its merits without being bound by the previous plea of guilt.

Case Title: Bichitra Mohanty v. State of Kerala

Related Post