P. PONNUSAMY versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

P. PONNUSAMY versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Because the Draft Rules (including Draft Rule 4) had not been adopted and brought into force by the High Courts/State Governments, they could not be invoked at the appellate stage; the right to disclosure recognised in Manoj applies at the trial stage after charges are framed and can be availed through trial...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: P. Ponnusamy; Respondent: The State of Tamil Nadu
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the High Court Order Dated 14.09.2022 in RT No. 02 of 2021 (death Reference and Tagged Appeals)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Right to Fair Trial, Death Reference / Confirmation of Death Sentence, Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2020/2021, Adjournment and Delay Tactics
Criminal Procedure Evidence Constitutional Law Disclosure of Documents Right to Fair Trial Death Reference / Confirmation of Death Sentence Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2020/2021 Adjournment and Delay Tactics

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. Ponnusamy

Appellant

The State of Tamil Nadu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the High Court Order Dated 14.09.2022 in RT No. 02 of 2021 (death Reference and Tagged Appeals)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether draft Rules of Criminal Practice (Draft Rule 4) could be invoked by accused at the appellate stage prior to their adoption by High Courts/State Governments
  2. 2 Whether accused were entitled to demand and obtain documents listed in a letter dated 05.09.2022 at the stage of the High Court death reference
  3. 3 Whether seeking such documents at the appellate stage amounted to a permissible exercise of right to fair trial or an attempt to delay proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Draft Rules (including Draft Rule 4) had not been adopted and brought into force by the High Courts/State Governments, they could not be invoked at the appellate stage; the right to disclosure recognised in Manoj applies at the trial stage after charges are framed and can be availed through trial procedures (including applications under Section 91 CrPC), with appellate remedies under Section 391 CrPC where necessary; seeking production of documents by letter at the appellate death-reference stage constituted an unjustified attempt to delay proceedings and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Present appeal dismissed as devoid of merits
  • Registry directed to circulate a copy of this order to all High Courts