Court Sets Aside Order Closing Cross-Examination Opportunity, Emphasizes Compliance with Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
In a significant ruling reinforcing the rights of persons with disabilities within the criminal justice system, the Uttarakhand High Court on October 6, 2026, set aside a trial court order that prematurely closed the cross-examination opportunity of Suchit Narang, a completely blind accused in a Special Sessions Trial. The division bench had earlier overturned Narang's conviction, directing the trial court to conduct a re-trial and ensure the accused's access to all prosecution evidence in accessible formats, including Braille, in compliance with Section 12(4)(a), (b), and (c) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The matter arose when the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Dehradun, declined Narang's request for a Braille copy of the examination-in-chief of the prosecution's first witness (PW-1), despite having supplied the accused with the witness's statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in Braille. This refusal led to the closure of Narang's opportunity to cross-examine the witness, a move challenged before the Uttarakhand High Court through a criminal revision petition.
The court, presided by Justice Alok Mahra, emphasized that providing material in accessible formats is not merely procedural but fundamental to ensuring a fair trial and effective participation by the accused. The judgment underscored that the accused's disability necessitates proactive measures to facilitate understanding of the evidence so that the accused can meaningfully instruct defense counsel and engage in the trial proceedings. The Court directed the trial court to furnish the examination-in-chief of PW-1 and all other prosecution evidence in accessible forms, including Braille, before allowing further proceedings.
Senior Advocate Manisha Bhandari, representing Narang, argued that the accused was deprived of a meaningful defense opportunity due to the non-availability of critical evidence in an accessible format, violating his statutory rights under the 2016 Act. The State, represented by AGA S.C. Dumka, had opposed the revision, supporting the trial court's order.
The judgment reiterates the mandate of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, which requires the government to ensure accessibility of all public documents and evidence to persons with disabilities in their preferred communication modes. The Court's decision serves as a vital precedent underscoring the judiciary's responsibility to adapt criminal procedures to accommodate the needs of disabled persons, thereby upholding constitutional guarantees of equality and fair trial.
The revision petition was allowed, and the Court instructed the trial court to comply with the directions immediately. The judgment clarifies that it does not comment on the merits of the prosecution case, focusing solely on procedural fairness and accessibility rights.
Bottom Line:
Fair trial - Blind accused is entitled to copies of examination-in-chief and other prosecution evidence in Braille or other accessible form - Closing opportunity to cross-examine without complying with Section 12 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and earlier remand directions is illegal.
Statutory provision(s):
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 Section 12(4)(a), (b), (c); Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) Section 161
Suchit Narang v. State of Uttarakhand, (Uttarakhand) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2992885
