The Kerala High Court highlighted the significance of scientific evidence in criminal cases. It stated that the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) is not permitted to delay scientific reports due to shortages in staff or infrastructure.
The case involved a petitioner from West Bengal seeking bail in a murder case. The court stressed the need to maintain the right to a speedy trial. The Kerala High Court expressed dissatisfaction on Wednesday over the delay in obtaining forensic reports in criminal cases, particularly as the crime rate continues to rise.
Justice CS Dias remarked, “As we enter the 75th year of Independence, it is evident that investigative agencies now heavily rely on scientific evidence and technology for crime investigation. In this era, we cannot simply cite staff shortages and infrastructure deficiencies as excuses.”
He further stated, “Given the alarming surge in crime rates in recent years, it is imperative that we ensure the establishment of adequate facilities for the dispensation of justice, especially considering the accused’s right to a speedy trial.
“If the scientific analysis is significantly delayed, as in the present case, the accused may exploit it as a viable defense, which would be detrimental to the broader public interest.”
Justice Dias made these remarks while addressing a bail application filed by a man from West Bengal charged with murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner asserted his innocence and highlighted his financial struggles and prolonged detention. However, the prosecution opposed his bail plea, citing the severity of the offense and asserting that the accused posed a flight risk.
In response, the court requested a report from the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) regarding the trial status. However, the ASJ reported delays due to the absence of forensic reports.
When informed by the Investigating Officer and the Director of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) that the delay was due to a backlog of cases and staff shortages, the court remarked, “The explanation provided by the FSL Director, attributing the four-year delay to the influx of cases under the POCSO Act and staff shortages, does not sit well with this court, as it does not align with the mandate of the doctrine of speedy and fair trial proclaimed by the Supreme Court.”
Despite acknowledging the petitioner’s lengthy custody duration, the High Court denied bail due to flight risk and urged completion of the trial within four months, emphasizing the need to expedite forensic reports.
Leave a Reply