Mahabir Vs State Of Haryana 2025 INSC 120 - S 372 CrPC - Victims' Right To Appeal - Art.20-22 Constitution - S 145 Evidence Act - Public Prosecutors

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 372 Proviso - The ‘proviso’ is a substantive enactment, and is not merely excepting something out of or qualifying what was excepting or goes before. Therefore, by adding the ‘proviso’ in Section 372 of CrPC by this amendment, a right has been created in favour of the victim -The proviso establishes an independent right and is not an exception to Section 372, but a stand-alone legal provision. The amendment made in Section 372 CrPC by adding a proviso in the year 2009 creating a substantive right of appeal is not retrospective in nature.(Para 54-72)

Constitution of India - Article 21 - In cases where there can be no dispute of facts, the constitutional courts have the power to award compensation in case a person has been deprived of his life and liberty without following the procedure established by law. (Para 84)

Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 154 - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 161,162,164 - the material elicited as contradiction by use of Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act is not substantive evidence. Even in regard to the statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC by authorised Magistrate, it has been held accordingly- Therefore, the fact that the contradictions are proved through the investigating officers though the witnesses have denied having made such statements, does not translate the contradictions into substantive evidence. Unless there is substantive evidence, it cannot be acted upon legally particularly to base a conviction. (Para 81) - The phrase 'if duly proved' in Section 162 of the CrPC indicates that the statements of witnesses recorded by the police cannot be immediately admitted as evidence or examined. They must first be proven through eliciting admissions from the witness during cross-examination and also during the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer. While statements made to the Investigating Officer can be used for contradiction, this can only be done after strict compliance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act. This requires drawing attention to the specific parts of the statement intended for contradiction. This is what is required under Section 145 of the Evidence Act but even where a witness is confronted by his previous statement and given an opportunity to explain that part of the statement that is put to him does not constitute substantive evidence. (Para 80)

Constitution of India - Article 20-22 - The right to consult an advocate of choice shall not be denied to any person who is arrested. This does not mean that persons who are not under arrest or custody can be denied such right- The service of a lawyer shall be available for consultation to the accused person under circumstances of near custodial interrogation. Moreover, the right against self-incrimination is best practiced & best promoted by conceding to the accused, the right to consult a legal practitioner of his choice. Lawyers’ presence is a constitutional claim in some circumstances of our country, and in the context of Article 20(3), is an assurance of awareness and observance of the right to silence. (Para 45)

Legal Maxim - "Actus curiae neminem gravabit” - Judicial actions should not unfairly harm any party and that courts should act judiciously to prevent errors that could lead to injustice."There is no higher principle for the guidance of the court than the one that no act of courts should harm a litigant and it is the bounden duty of the courts to see that if a person is harmed by a mistake of the court he should be restored to the position he would have occupied, but for that mistake." (Para 4-5)

Public Prosecutors - State Governments across the country appoint AGPs and APPs in their respective High Courts solely on political considerations. Favouritism and nepotism is one additional factor for compromising merit - The AGPs and APPs in respective High Courts should be appointed solely on the merit of the person. The State Government owes a duty to ascertain the ability of the person; how proficient the person is in law, his overall background, his integrity etc- Role of Public Prosecutors explained (Para 92-98)

Interpretation of Statutes - A statute which creates new rights shall be construed to be prospective in operation unless otherwise provided, either expressly or by necessary implication. (Para 72)