By Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain two separate pleas seeking directions to the government to frame guidelines for compensation to victims of wrongful prosecution. A bench of Justices U U Lalit and S R Bhat said the issue involves lawmaking and will create a lot of complications.
“Once we lay down guidelines, every Trial Court would be obliged to consider the issue when judgments will be rendered. We’ll be adding one more facet of the matter. Many of the acquittals are not on merits but on technical grounds and benefits of doubt,” said justice Lalit.
“The nature of relief prayed for is in the realm of laying down guidelines or in the nature of the legislation. It will not be possible for this court to utilise its processes. The attention of the Union of India and relevant agencies has been invited to the case portrayed in the form of a petition. It is now left to concerned agencies or instrumentalities to take appropriate action. We, therefore, see no reason to entertain any longer. The wit petitions are disposed of,” the bench said.
Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, appearing in the matter, submitted that there are no safeguards in case of malicious prosecution. The top court on March 23, 2021, while issuing notice to the Centre on one of the pleas filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and BJP leader Kapil Mishra, had refused to issue notices to the states and National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Upadhyay had sought directions to the Centre, all states, and Union Territories to frame and implement guidelines to compensate victims of “wrongful prosecution” through government machinery.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain two separate pleas seeking directions to the government to frame guidelines for compensation to victims of wrongful prosecution. A bench of Justices U U Lalit and S R Bhat said the issue involves lawmaking and will create a lot of complications.
“Once we lay down guidelines, every Trial Court would be obliged to consider the issue when judgments will be rendered. We’ll be adding one more facet of the matter. Many of the acquittals are not on merits but on technical grounds and benefits of doubt,” said justice Lalit.
“The nature of relief prayed for is in the realm of laying down guidelines or in the nature of the legislation. It will not be possible for this court to utilise its processes. The attention of the Union of India and relevant agencies has been invited to the case portrayed in the form of a petition. It is now left to concerned agencies or instrumentalities to take appropriate action. We, therefore, see no reason to entertain any longer. The wit petitions are disposed of,” the bench said.
Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, appearing in the matter, submitted that there are no safeguards in case of malicious prosecution. The top court on March 23, 2021, while issuing notice to the Centre on one of the pleas filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and BJP leader Kapil Mishra, had refused to issue notices to the states and National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Upadhyay had sought directions to the Centre, all states, and Union Territories to frame and implement guidelines to compensate victims of “wrongful prosecution” through government machinery.
