http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: LT. COL., S.J. CHAUDHARY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/01/1984

BENCH: REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) BENCH: REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) MISRA, R.B. (J)

CITATION:  1984 AIR  618            1984 SCR  (2) 438  1984 SCC  (1) 722        1984 SCALE  (1)92

ACT:      Criminal Procedure-Trial  by sessions  court to proceed from day to day. Trial-when could be adjourned.      Practice-Duty of Advocate.

HEADNOTE:      The petitioner sought modification of the Court’s order that the  trial should proceed from day to day on the ground that his  advocates were  not prepared to appear in the case from day to day as the trial was likely to be prolonged.      Dismissing the petition, ^      HELD:  It   will  be   in  the  interest  of  both  the prosecution and  the defence  that the  trial proceeds  from day-to-day. Before commencing a trial, a Sessions Judge must satisfy himself that all necessary evidence is available. If it is  not, he  may postpone  the  case,  but  only  on  the strongest possible  ground and  for  the  shortest  possible period. Once  the trial  commences, he  should, except for a very pressing  reason which makes an adjournment inevitable, proceed de  die in diem until the trial is concluded. [439C- D]      It is  the duty of every advocate who accepts the brief in a  criminal case  to attend  the trial  from  day-to-day. Having accepted the brief, he will be committing a breach of his professional duty, if he so fails to attend. [439 E-F]

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL   APPELLATE   JURISDICTION:   Criminal   Misc. Petition No.  284 of  1984 in Special Leave Petn. (Crl.) No. 3000 of 1983.      K.L. Sharma,  K.K. Mohan  and Mrs. Geetanjali Mohan for the Petitioner.      K.G. Bhagat, Additional Solicitor General, R.D. Agarwal and R.N. Poddar for the Respondent.      The order of the Court was delivered by:      CHINNAPPA REDDY. J. By an order dated December 2, 1983, this court  while dismissing a petition for special leave to appeal filed

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

439 against an  order of  the Delhi High Court refusing to grant bail to  the petitioner  until  after  examination  of  Rani Chaudhary as  a  witness,  gave  a  direction  that  on  the commencement of  the trial,  it should  proceed from day-to- day. Alleging  that his  two Advocates  are not  prepared to appear in the case from day-to-day as the trial is likely to be  prolonged,   the  petitioner   has  filed,  the  present application for  modification of  the earlier  order of this court by the deletion of the direction that the trial should proceed from day-to-day.      We think  it is  an entirely wholesome practice for the trial to  go on  from day-to-day.  It is must expedient that the trial  before the  court of a Session should proceed and be dealt with continuously from its inception to its finish. Not only  will it  result in expedition, it will also result in the  elimination of manoeuvre and mischief. It will be in the interest  of both  the prosecution  and the defence that the trial  proceeds from  day-to-day.  It  is  necessary  to realise that  Sessions cases  must not  be tried  piecemeal. Before commencing  a trial,  a Sessions  Judge must  satisfy himself that  all necessary  evidence is available, If it is not, he  may postpone  the case,  but only  on the strongest possible ground  and for  the shortest possible period. Once the trial  commences, he  should, except for a very pressing reason which makes an adjournment inevitable, proceed de die in diem until the trial is concluded.      We are  unable to  appreciate the difficulty said to be experienced  by  the  petitioner.  It  is  stated  that  his Advocate is  finding it  difficult to  attend the court from day-to-day. It  is the  duty of  every Advocate, who accepts the brief  in a  criminal case to attend the trial from day- today. We  cannot over-stress  the duty  of the  Advocate to attend to  the trial  from day-to-day.  Having accepted  the brief, he  will be  committing a  breach of his professional duty, if  he so  fails to attend. The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is, therefore, dismissed. H.S.K.    Petition dismissed. 440