( ISSN 2277 - 9809 (online) ISSN 2348 - 9359 (Print) ) New DOI : 10.32804/IRJMSH

Impact Factor* - 6.2311


**Need Help in Content editing, Data Analysis.

Research Gateway

Adv For Editing Content

   No of Download : 112    Submit Your Rating     Cite This   Download        Certificate

WITHDRAWAL FROM PROSECUTION

    1 Author(s):  BELU GUPTA ARORA

Vol -  6, Issue- 12 ,         Page(s) : 326 - 330  (2015 ) DOI : https://doi.org/10.32804/IRJMSH

Abstract

In our criminal justice system, generally speaking, the prosecutor representing the State accuses the defendant of the commission of the alleged crime; and the law requires him to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt. The criminal justice system as such recognizes equal rights and opportunities to both the parties, i.e. the State and the accused person, to present their cases before the court. But under the prevailing condition in India, the equal legal rights and opportunities would in practice operate unequally and harshly, affecting adversely the poor indigent accused persons who are unable to engage competent lawyers for their defence. The system therefore, departs from its strict theoretical passive instance and attempts to provide legal aid at State costs to indigent accused persons to defend themselves in criminal trial.

  1. K.N. Chandrashekharan Pillai, R.V. KELKAR'S LECTURES ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 4th Edition, 2011, EBC. 
  2. Ibid. 
  3. Subhash Chander v. State, AIR 1980 SC 423.
  4. Balwant Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1977 SC 2265.
  5. Rajender Kumar v. State, AIR 1980 SC 1510.  
  6. Sankarnarayanan v. Balakrishanan, AIR 1972 SC 496. 
  7. Ibid.
  8. 1983 SCR (2) 61. 
  9. 1980 SCR (3) 982 
  10. Criminal Appeal No. 736 of 2007 decided by supreme court in 2008. 

*Contents are provided by Authors of articles. Please contact us if you having any query.






Bank Details