The Allahabad High Court recently acquitted a man in a 42-year-old case after it was told the trial court records in the matter were missing [Shri Ram Singh vs State].

Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava said the conviction order cannot be sustained due to the non-availability of vital and basic records. 

“Resultantly, the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellant, as recorded by the trial court vide impugned judgement and order dated 30.09.1982, is set-aside and the sole surviving appellant Shri Ram Singh is acquitted of the charge under Section 201 IPC levelled against him. His sureties and personal bonds are ordered to be discharged,” the Court said. 

The convict Ram Singh had moved an appeal in 1982 against his conviction by Session Judge of Ballia in a case under Section 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of the Indian Penal Code. He had been sentenced to 4 years rigorous imprisonment.

However, by the time his appeal came up for hearing, the entire record except the original judgment and order of the trial court had been weeded out. The appeal remained pending for 42 years. 

“A perusal of the record reveals that complete trial court record was summoned, but only a part of the record was sent by the District Judge, Ballia which includes only impugned judgment and order. No other document is available on record to proceed with the present appeal,” the Court said in the order dated September 9.

The Court had also called for a report on whether reconstruction of the trial court record or retrial was possible. However, the District Judge in Ballai told the High Court last month that it was not possible.  

In similar circumstances, the High Court in 2010 had acquitted a convict. Justice Srivastava took note of other decisions in similar cases as well and said,

“The dictum of law, which flows from the above is that if the substantial portion of trial court record is not available before the Appellate Court, an endeavour should be made firstly for the reconstruction of the record and if only reconstruction is not possible to facilitate the High Court to hear and dispose of the appeal, then possibility should be looked into for the retrial of the case and if due to the loss of vital and basic records of the trial court retrial and fresh adjudication of the matter is not possible, then in that case the impugned judgment and order should not be permitted to operate and the matter shall stand closed.”

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the judgment passed on September 30, 1982 was set aside. 

Advocate RK Kanaujiya represented the convict.

[Read Judgment]