Negligence cause for low convictions

Time gap between crime, commencement of trial cause for delays

THE REPORT said in 34,417 cases, trials were completed and 2,86,456 cases were pending. In Hyderabad, trials were completed in 3,380 cases, with 35,279 cases still pending.

Low rate of conviction is due to negligence in prosecution and inability of cops to maintain witness statements till the time the case goes to the court for trial, apart from retracting complaints, according to advocates from the state High Court.

At the same time, police officials say that strong scientific evidence is what helps them in most cases to secure a conviction. According to them, the Telangana state police have a conviction percentage of 50.03 in 2021.

As per the latest NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau) report, 10,957 cases are pending in the state from the previous year in 2020, with 83.7 as the pendency percentage.

The report said in 34,417 cases, trials were completed and 2,86,456 cases were pending. In Hyderabad, trials were completed in 3,380 cases, with 35,279 cases still pending.

Syed Tousif Basha, an advocate of the Telangana High court, said the conviction rate was less in the state because when once the cases were filed, a charge sheet was prepared and till the case came for commencement of trial, there was a minimum gap of at least three years.

During this time, some parties compromised, some might not depose in the court as they move away or shift their residences. Due to such inconsistencies, the conviction rate was low. However, whether the witnesses were traceable or not, the crucial thing was that they could be convicted based on the evidence which the police provided, he said.

“How the cops react during the deposition, how strong is the evidence, and other factors are considered. The court should find a person guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Even the benefit of doubt is considered as an important factor as the system follows the ‘let a 100 guilty be acquitted but not one innocent should be imprisoned’,” he said, adding that oftentimes, the complainant also retracted their statements after coming to an understanding, as there was a huge gap between the time of complaint and trial.

Alleging a possible nexus between the police and the accused in cases, advocates said that cases also got ‘settled’ outside the court in the form of compromise after the accused reached out to the police. “It is the duty of the police to get witnesses to the court and depose them. Once the accused goes to court, he often colludes with cops. The police have negligence on the part of the prosecution as they must ensure solid evidence is built against an accused and that the witness must not change their statements while in court,” said the advocates.

Meanwhile, police officials said that for example, in cases of sexual assault, once the offence was proved by medical, chemical and DNA tests, apart from physical and other evidence, even the victim could not save the accused. “When a crime is committed, police officers must file a complaint, acquire evidence, identify the perpetrator, construct charges against him, and aid in his prosecution in court in order to secure a conviction. The quality of crime investigation has changed due to higher crime rates, several vacancies, and overburdened police staff. Crime investigation involves forensic capabilities and infrastructure, as well as skills and training, time and resources,” said senior police officials.