Supreme Court's Caution Against Frivolous Prosecution
The Supreme Court of India highlighted the need for the State to avoid initiating criminal prosecution against citizens without a reasonable prospect of conviction. This approach not only infringes on the citizens' right to a fair process but also burdens the judicial system.
Key Observations
- The police and criminal courts should act as initial filters to ensure only cases with a strong suspicion proceed to trial, maintaining judicial efficiency and integrity.
- The judgment was based on a case involving charges of voyeurism and intimidation against two brothers, which the court dismissed as unsubstantiated.
Details of the Case
- Incident involved a woman accusing two brothers of taking photos and filming her on their mobile camera.
- The event occurred in 2020 when the woman and others attempted to enter the brothers' property, claiming to be tenants.
- The Supreme Court found no evidence supporting the charge of voyeurism as defined by law, which involves capturing images during a private act.
Supreme Court's Verdict
- The woman was identified as a prospective tenant without any right of entry without consent.
- No grounds were found for charges of criminal intimidation to persist.
Implications of Frivolous Prosecution
- Filing charges without strong suspicion clogs the judicial system.
- This practice diverts judicial resources from serious cases, contributing to case backlogs.
In essence, the Supreme Court's ruling aims to prevent unnecessary legal proceedings that lack substantial evidence, fostering an effective and fair judicial process.
