What was held in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shobharam regarding the right to consult a lawyer under Article 22?

In State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shobharam, the Supreme Court held that a person arrested on accusation of a crime becomes entitled to be defended by a counsel at the trial and this right is not lost even if he is released on bail, or is tried by a court which has no power to impose a sentence of imprisonment. Thus, a provision barring a lawyer from appearing before a Nyaya Panchanyat would be void to the extent it denied a person arrested the right to be defended by a lawyer of his choice in a trial for the crime for which he has been arrested. If, however, no request for being represented by a lawyer has been made, and so no such request has been turned down, then there is no breach of Fundamental Rights contained in Article 22 (1).

Originally written on September 28, 2014 and last modified on September 28, 2014.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *