the goan I network
PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa has dismissed a petition filed by former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal who had sought for the resumption of his trial in December since his preferred advocate wasn’t available until then.
Tejpal in his arguments claimed that he has engaged Advocate Shrikant Shivade from Pune to defend him and that the latter was busy with five other cases, out of which four are in Mumbai and one is at Pune. As a result, Tejpal noted, Adv Shivade would be unable to attend the Sessions Court in October and November 2019.
He argued that he has the right to be defended by an advocate of his choice and that such a provision was necessary for ensuring that there is a fair trial. He called for a fair opportunity to defend himself which is part of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Public prosecutor Adv S R Rivankar argued that the victim has already been issued summons and has made arrangements to travel to Goa for the hearing scheduled for October 21.
“She has obtained leave and made all travel arrangements to remain present before the Sessions Judge on 21.10.2019 onwards. It may not be possible to disrupt the programme particularly when the matter is expedited by the Supreme Court,” Adv Rivankar argued.
The High Court observed, “This court has to take note that according to the prosecution there are about 75 witnesses which are to be examined. Therefore, the trial has to proceed in order to be concluded within the time fixed by the Supreme Court.”
“There cannot be any manner of dispute that a party or an accused is entitled to be represented by an advocate of his choice. However, this is not a case where the petitioner has been disallowed to be represented by any such advocate. The issue is entirely about the expeditious conduct of the trial within the period as fixed by the SC,” the court noted.
“In my considered view, in the given circumstances, where the victim has already made her travel arrangements to come down to India from the UK from 21st to 23rd October, 2019, and further having regard to the direction of the Supreme Court for expeditious and time-bound disposal of the Sessions case, it is not possible for this court to interfere with the dates and the programme so fixed. The petition is accordingly dismissed,” Justice C V Bhadang ruled.
