Uttaranchal High Court: In a criminal appeal filed by the blind accused for setting aside conviction and 20-year sentence under Sections 376 and 354-A of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 4 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’), the Division Bench of G. Narendar*, C.J., and Alok Mahra, J., observing that the denial of trial documents in Braille script to the blind accused is a violation of his right to a fair trial and access to justice, set aside the conviction order and sentence. Furthermore, the Court remitted the matter to the Trial Court for a retrial of the blind man accused under POCSO.
Background
The accused was a music teacher in a school for the blind. He was accused of touching the private parts of minor girls and exploiting them. An FIR was registered, and subsequently, he was found guilty under Sections 376 and 354-A IPC 1860 and Sections 4 and 10 of the POCSO Act and was sentenced to 20 years. The accused had filed the present appeal for setting aside his conviction and sentence.
Analysis
The Court noted that despite the accused being blind with no vision and ability to read, understand, and instruct his counsel, all the documents that were furnished to him were in Devnagari script. This, the Court noted, was a deprivation of the right of the accused to a fair trial.
The Court said that “depriving an accused person of material documents and a description of material objects in a language known to them unequivocally compromises their right to understand the charges and the evidence against them”. The Court further added that this would also seriously prejudice the ability of the accused to respond at the time of questioning by the Court in exercise of the powers under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’).
The Court opined that the “failure to provide documents in Braille script ‘vitiated and rendered the trial unfair’ due to the accused’s inability to read, comprehend, and instruct his counsel effectively”.
The Court noted that Section 12 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (‘2016 Act’), mandates the appropriate Government to ensure public documents are in accessible formats, filing departments are equipped with accessible formats, and facilities are provided for recording testimonies in preferred languages and communication means for persons with disabilities.
Therefore, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence, and remitted the matter to the Trial Court for re-trial of the blind man accused under POCSO. The Court, further, directed that the re-trial was to be conducted after furnishing the material in compliance with Section 12 of the 2016 Act. Pending re-trial, the accused was directed to be released on bail upon executing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- and furnishing one surety of the like sum.
[Suchit Narang v. State of Uttarakhand, Criminal Appeal No. 299 of 2024, decided on 18-06-2025]
*Judgment authored by: Chief Justice G. Narendar
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Appellant: Manisha Bhandari, Shashwat Sidhant, Dhruv Chandra, Ishita Dhaila, Advocates, Divya Jain, counsel
For the Respondent: J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General, R.K. Joshi, Advocate
