SURENDRA KOLI V.STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH (2023) SC 233
- The government, in conjunction with the judiciary and legal professionals, should establish a stringent mechanism to minimize unwarranted delays and procedural inefficiencies in handling such cases.
-
The Central Bureau of Investigation, recognized for its thorough investigations into missing and unidentified persons, was expected to adopt a methodical approach in prosecuting cases. This entailed organizing evidence chronologically and assessing charges. However, the agency did not consistently uphold timely and legally sustainable prosecution, which was contrary to expectations.
- When an offender is detained for misconduct in one case while simultaneously having their prosecution dropped in other cases, it heightens the challenge of identifying them and complicates the apprehension of other perpetrators of crime in the absence of a judicial verdict
- At the conclusion of this judgment, a question emerged questioning the need for subsequent and separate court trials when the fate of the accused remains unaffected regardless of the outcomes in this entire chronology of subsequent trials.
- In summary, this case holds a distinctive place in Indian constitutional law. It established essential principles regarding the limitations of fundamental rights and laid down guidelines for evaluating the reasonableness of restrictions on these rights. This case continues to resonate in the legal landscape of India, reaffirming the delicate balance between individual liberties and the collective welfare of society.
-->
