Supreme Court Directs Trial Courts To Inform Accused Of Their Right To Legal Aid Before Recording Evidence

The Supreme Court has recently mandated that trial courts must inform accused persons of their right to legal representation, including free legal aid, and record the same in their orders prior to the examination of witnesses.

The direction was issued while granting bail to an accused who had spent over four years in custody in a narcotics case involving the alleged seizure of contraband of commercial quantity.

The case arose from the arrest of Reginamary Chellamani in connection with an NDPS case registered by the Customs Department, wherein the prosecution alleged that the contraband recovered from her was of commercial quantity. Following her arrest, Chellamani remained in judicial custody as the matter proceeded to trial. Her application for bail was rejected by the Madras High Court on July 24, 2025, prompting her to approach the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court granted bail to Reginamary Chellamani, who had spent four years in custody, noting that another co-accused on the same flight had already been released. The Court observed that Chellamani was initially unable to cross-examine witnesses due to lack of legal representation, highlighting a recurring issue in criminal trials.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K Vinod Chandran noted, “It is incumbent upon the trial Courts dealing with criminal proceedings, faced with such situations, to inform the accused of their right to legal representation and their entitlement to be represented by legal aid counsel in the event they cannot afford a counsel. The trial Courts shall record the offer made to the accused in this regard, the response of the accused to such offer and also the action taken thereupon in their orders, before commencing examination of the witnesses.”

“The trial Courts shall record the offer made to the accused in this regard, the response of the accused to such offer and also the action taken thereupon in their orders, before commencing examination of the witnesses,” the Court stated.