#Right to Defence

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a litigant’s delay in submitting documents under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC cannot override the fundamental right to defend, especially when evidence has not yet begun. This reinforces procedural fairness in family court proceedings and ensures that substantive justice prevails over technical non-compliance.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has ruled that an accused’s right to call defence witnesses cannot be extinguished due to procedural delay unless the trial court has formally closed the defence evidence. This reinforces that procedural fairness under BNSS Section 528 requires courts to preserve the accused’s opportunity to present a complete defence, even if witnesses are sought late in the trial process.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that an accused person cannot be forced to aid investigators in locating or surrendering incriminating material, as doing so violates the constitutional right against self-incrimination. This clarifies that passive cooperation - such as appearing for questioning - does not equate to an obligation to actively facilitate evidence recovery, strengthening the defence’s procedural shield under the new BNSS framework.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that under Section 348 BNSS, a petition to recall a witness cannot be granted based on vague assertions that prior counsel failed to cross-examine adequately. Only concrete, case-specific grounds demonstrating a failure of justice will justify recall, reinforcing procedural integrity and deterring tactical delays in criminal trials.

Madras High Court rules that denying impleadment of third-party vehicle owners/insurers in motor accident claims-when their negligence is alleged-violates Article 21's right to a fair defence. The court mandates trial courts to permit impleadment and decide cases on merits within three months, reinforcing procedural fairness in liability disputes.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that denying an accused the right to examine themselves as a defence witness under BNSS Section 353 violates fair trial rights under Article 21.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds accused may summon call detail records at defence stage under BNSS Section 256(3), affirming right to fair trial under Article 21.