Dishonest recording of proceedings is greatest injustice: Delhi High Court

 IT IS SEEN AT MAXIMUM COURTS , JUDGES SEEMS TO BE BIAS AND DENY TO RECORD POINTS WHICH CAN DELIVER ORDER ON MERITS. POINTS WHICH ARE NOT RECORDED MEANS NEVER DISCUSSED IN COURT.

30. A three-Judge bench of the Supreme Court in Rattiram Vs. State of M.P., (2012) 4 SCC 516, observed:

"39. ... Fundamentally, a fair and impartial trial has a sacrosanct purpose. It has a demonstrable object that the accused should not be prejudiced. A fair trial is required to be conducted in such a manner which would totally ostracise injustice, prejudice, dishonesty and favouritism."

P 53 ......A Judge who does not honestly and fairly record the proceedings, does the greatest injustice to the parties. A judge is supposed to have no personal interest in a case being tried or dealt with by him. He is always expected to truthfully record the proceedings conducted by him. It is for this reason, that the proceedings recorded by a judge in his orders is accepted as true. If a judge breaches this trust reposed in him, it reflects on his credibility and on his independence and impartiality.

14. Ms. John submits that the aforesaid shows that the learned Special Judge is proceeding in the matter with complete lack of compassion and in a reckless manner. The learned Special Judge is behaving in a tyrannical and inhuman manner, showing complete disregard for human relationships and emotions. Even the Senior PP for the CBI was taking advantage of the attitude of the learned Special Judge, and rather than adopting a reasonable and fair stand, he too appears to have turned equally unreasonable and uncompassionate.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64141047/

http://164.100.69.66/jupload/dhc/VSA/judgement/04-01-2017/VSA21122016TRP882016.pdf

TR.P.(CRL.)-88/2016 

21-12-2016(pdf) 

VINOD KUMAR CHAUHAN  

Vs

STATE THR. CBI & ORS.