Law must act as shield for innocent, not as a sword for the vindictive: SC
NEW DELHI: Highlighting that criminal proceedings cause social stigma and irreparable harm to the reputation and liberty of an individual, Supreme Court has said the accused must not be compelled to undergo the ordeal of trial when material and evidence do not establish grave suspicion of guilt. A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and P B Varale said trial proceedings cannot be allowed on the basis of vague statements and quashed a corruption case against a govt official in Odisha after noting that there was no specific allegation against him. “This court is further persuaded by the broader consideration that the criminal process must not be permitted to degenerate into an instrument of oppression. The law must act as a shield for the innocent, not as a sword in the hands of the vindictive. Where the material does not disclose the commission of an offence, the court is duty-bound to interdict the proceedings at the threshold. The criminal trial is not a mere formality, nor a ritualistic procedure to be endured regardless of merit…” the bench said. It said there must be clear and specific material that shows the accused might have committed the crime before trial proceedings are initiated. It noted that the allegation against the accused was wide enough to implicate several people, without regard to individual acts or culpability, which is impermissible under law. “We’re of the opinion the presence of general allegations, without any overt act or specific imputations against the accused, cannot be sufficient to proceed to trial.”
