The field of Criminal Justice can be broken down into two parts: criminal and justice. Criminal justice maintains the conviction that every person, involving those who are responsible for crimes, deserve a fair trial^[1] and just treatment. This can only be achieved by ensuring that their rights, as outlined in the constitution, are upheld. Similarly, human rights are inherent rights that every individual inherently possesses.

Defining Criminal Justice System

Criminal justice is a system that ensures individuals accused of crimes receive fair representation and justice. It ensures that no person is considered a criminal until proven guilty in court, providing them with a fair chance to present their case. The criminal justice system consists of these three main parts: police, courts and correctional and rehabilitation centres.

The police start an investigation by filing an FIR and collecting evidence. If they don’t find enough evidence, the suspect is let go. But if there is enough evidence, they file a charge sheet with all the details of the offence and the offender’s actions.

The courtroom, led by a judge along with a prosecutor and defence attorney, handles conflicts related to an accuser in a criminal case. The prosecutor, who may be civilian or working for the government, provides evidence and makes arguments. The court reviews the case, listening to viewpoints from both parties. If the accused is found not guilty, they are freed; if found guilty, they can receive a jail sentence. A correctional or rehabilitation centre is where individuals who have been convicted are sent by the court for help in turning their lives around. In cases involving juveniles or people with mental health issues, they may be directed to rehabilitation centres where they receive the necessary care and support during their rehabilitation.

Defining Human Right

All individuals are entitled to fundamental human rights, regardless of whether they are accused individuals or convicted offenders. This principle is outlined in the Equality and Human Rights Commission^[2] . Human beings are naturally entitled to certain rights from birth, 2 regardless of their background. These rights, known as human rights, are inherent and cannot be granted or revoked by any authority.

The criminal justice system is made up of the Police, Judiciary, and Correctional Institutions, all of which are crucial in ensuring the defence of human rights that could compromised during criminal proceedings. Unfortunately, there have been instances of violence in police custody, unlawful detention, and even the sexual assault of female prisoners. These issues persist and must be addressed by the criminal justice system. While the Court has taken action in some cases, these occurrences are still not fully under control.

India has agreed to and signed the Declaration, as well as implemented laws to safeguard human rights. The Indian Constitution recognizes human rights as fundamental rights, including under Article 21 “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”^[3] is one of the most 3 important provisions that guarantee the right to life and personal liberty. This includes various other rights.

Article 20(1)^[4] provides that one can only face legal action in relation to an offence that is considered a crime when it was first put into operation, and not in the past or future. There are certain statutes that state that a criminal cannot be tried twice for the same crime. This is also known as “double jeopardy” and is formally enshrined in the Constitution and Criminal Procedure Code. In many cases, there are guidelines for the state to follow when dealing with criminals. Maneka Gandhi case^[5] , Parmanad Katara case^[6] ,etc.

Sources of human rights violations in the Indian criminal justice system. The sources of human rights violations in the Indian criminal justice system include the police, prisons, and the state. Police are the mainstay of law enforcement in this country. But when the police don’t respect people’s fundamental rights and human rights, it becomes a problem. The police overwhelm the common people and do not allow them to raise their voices.

There were several cases where police illegally arrested criminals and abused criminals in prison. Complaints about police tampering with evidence have long accumulated. Prisons are established for the purpose of rehabilitation and rehabilitation of criminals. However, their situation is dire. Criminals have no suitable place to sleep or complete their daily morning tasks. The food given to prisoners is something that normal people would not want to eat. There were also cases of illegal detention. Prisoners were held for longer periods than they were entitled to. In the Hussain ara Khatoon case^[6] the Supreme Court deemed this a disgrace to the judicial System. The state is considered the guardian of human rights in this country. However, guardians are rather violators of human rights. The national executive has great powers, which it abuses and sometimes takes coercive measures.

Importance of Human Rights at Global Perspective

Considering national and international perspectives on human rights in the criminal justice  system is critical to ensuring fairness, accountability and respect for fundamental rights. At the national level, laws and policies determine how justice is administered within national borders, but international standards provide a broader framework for assessing the effectiveness and legitimacy of these institutions.

By considering both perspectives, policymakers, practitioners, and advocates can identify gaps, address deficiencies, and promote a more just and equitable criminal justice system. The study of human rights in criminal justice systems at the national level involves the analysis of local laws, procedures, and practices through the lens of internationally recognized human rights principles. This includes the extent to which local laws and our procedures adhere to international human rights standards treaties and enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention against Torture and Other Atrocities.

This includes evaluating the cruel, inhumane treatment or penalty. One aspect of the review relating to arrest, detention, trial and punishment. This includes assessing whether national law provides sufficient safeguards in order to defend the rights of criminal suspects, such as the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and the prohibition of torture and arbitrary detention.

It also aims to examine the actual implementation of these laws, including the behaviour of law enforcement officials, the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, and conditions in detention centres. Additionally, to consider national perspectives, criminal justice policies and practices for marginalised and disadvantaged populations, such as racialized minorities, indigenous peoples, refugees, immigrants, women, children, people with disabilities, and LGBTQ+ people.

It is necessary to consider the impact of This includes analysis of disparities in arrest rates, sentencing outcomes, and access to justice based on factors such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, and immigration status. This includes systems that prohibit these organisations from fully exercising their rights within the criminal justice system, including discrimination, prejudice, lack of legal representation, language barriers, and inadequate access to support services. This includes identifying potential barriers. Furthermore, considering the national perspective, it is necessary to assess the mechanisms of responsibility and redress when abuses of human rights take place inside the criminal judicial system. This includes assessing the effectiveness of oversight bodies, such as ombudsmen, human rights commissions, and independent monitoring mechanisms, in investigating complaints, prosecuting perpetrators, and providing redress for victims.

This includes an analysis of the role of civil society organisations, media, and other stakeholders in defending human rights and promoting transparency, accountability, and reform in the criminal justice system. In contrast, considering human rights in the criminal justice system from an international perspective means analysing states’ obligations under international legislation and making them accountable for any infractions of human rights standards. This includes assessing the extent to which countries have accepted global human rights treaties and incorporated their provisions into domestic law.

This includes examining States’ compliance with the recommendations and judgments of international human rights institutions, such as treaty monitoring bodies, special rapporteurs, and regional human rights tribunals.

One aspect of learning international perspectives is to appreciate the role of international human rights mechanisms in monitoring and reporting the human rights situation in different countries. This includes reviewing reports, country visits, and communications from international human rights institutions to assess trends, identify patterns of abuse, and make recommendations for reform.

This includes an analysis of the impact of international pressure, such as diplomatic intervention, sanctions, and targeted lobbying, on promoting human rights and accountability in the criminal justice system.

Furthermore, considering the international perspective requires consideration of the role of international humanitarian law in regulating acts of armed conflict and combating violations

of human rights and humanitarian law by states and non-state actors. This includes assessing each country’s compliance with its obligations under treaties such as the Geneva Conventions and its Additional Protocols, and with customary norms of international humanitarian law.

This includes considering efforts to hold perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide to account through national and international justice mechanisms, including national courts, complex tribunals and the International Criminal Tribunal.

Furthermore, considering the international perspective requires assessing the role of international cooperation and assistance in strengthening state capacity to promote and protect human rights in criminal justice systems.

This includes technical assistance programs and capacity building provided by international

organisations, donor governments and non-governmental organisations to support reforms

in areas such as law reform, institution building, training of judicial personnel and provision of

legal aid services.

This includes an evaluation of initiatives and funding mechanisms, an analysis of the influence of global norms and standards and transnational advocacy networks on the formation of national regulations and procedures pertaining to human rights and criminal justice.

Statutory rights and procedural safeguards in domestic law of India

i.Provision under Constitution of India.

The Indian Constitution upholds constitutional protections for accused persons, ensuring a free and fair trial. This principle is based on justice, with prosecutors proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Constitutional protections shield those who are charged from arbitrary arrest and investigation, ensuring a fair and just trial. The foundation of our Constitution rests on the belief that it is better for many guilty individuals to avoid punishment than for a single innocent person to be wrongly accused. The right to receive fair legal representation in criminal cases is a crucial component of the principle of equality Article 14^[8], Article 20^[9] and Article 21^[10] of the Constitution guarantees fair representation in criminal proceedings, ensuring that no person is convicted unless the act was in violation at the moment of the offence of the law. Article 21 ensures that no person is detained in any country, and legal advisors can receive consultation and representation from a lawyer of their choice. These are unchangeable, inalienable rights.

ii.Provision under Criminal Law

The principle of presumption of innocence, as articulated by Blackstone, highlights how crucial it is to make sure that it is better to let ten guilty individuals go free than to risk one innocent people suffering. The foundation of a fair legal process rests on the notion that someone is presumed innocent unless and unless they are proven guilty without a reasonable doubt.

Understanding Your Rights When Arrested; Section 50(1) of the CRPC. state, If you are placed under arrest without a warrant, you have right to be informed of the specifics of the crime for which you have been detained. If you are taken into custody on a warrant, you must be made aware of the warrant's specifics or shown the warrant if requested. Section 75 of the CRPC. grants you the right to bail; if you are taken into custody without a warrant for a bailable offence, the police officer must inform you that you are qualified to receive a bail release by paying the required amount. The right to appear immediately away before a magistrate is guaranteed, regardless of whether the arrest was made with or without a warrant. According to Sections 56 and 76 of the code, the arrested person must be brought before a judicial officer within 24 hours. The right to a free, fair, and speedy trial is essential, as justice delay is justice denied. The concept of a speedy and expeditious trial ensures that accused individuals receive fair and impartial justice promptly. The privilege of consultation a legal practitioner is a fundamental right protected by Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution and must always be granted without exception. Section 50(3) of the Code states that the individual facing proceedings has the right to choose their own defence lawyer. The right to Free Legal Aid entails that magistrates and courts must notify impoverished defendants of their entitlement to free legal assistance. Failing to provide this aid to indigent defendants, unless explicitly declined, can invalidate the trial, resulting in the conviction and sentence being overturned.

The right to have a medical professional examine you is outlined in Section 54 of Cr.P.C. This allows the arrested person to request an examination by a registered medical practitioner unless the Magistrate believes the request is being made to cause trouble or delays, or to obstruct justice.

It is crucial to have the right to solitude and to be shielded from illegal searches. Police officials must not invade the accused's privacy based solely on suspicion. A search warrant is required for the police to search the property of the accused.

According to Section 273 of the Code, all evidence and statements must be recorded in the presence of the accused or their criminal lawyer to ensure their right to be present during the trial. The accused right to receive copies of all documents filed by the prosecutor related to the case. The defendant has the right to attend their trial and hear witnesses testify against them. The defendant is entitled to cross-examination, which allows the prosecutor to question them in order to establish their innocence. “When a person is arrested, they have the right to appeal their conviction in a higher court. Additionally, while in prison, the accused should be treated humanely and have their rights as humans upheld by the jail administration.”^[11]

iv. Provision under Evidence Act

According to the Evidence Act of 1872^[12], an accused individual is entitled to the assumption of innocence as outlined in Section 102 and Section 105. Accordingly, a person is presumed innocent unless and until they are proven guilty, also known as the Assumption of Inoculation. But there are circumstances where this presumption may not apply, such as in cases where intent does not need to be proven or in instances of drug abuse, dowry, and terrorist activities. During a trial, the person being accused has the opportunity to bring forward a witness or question a witness to help support their case. This right is outlined in Sections 103,133, and 166 of the Evidence Act.

Right to Acknowledge Guilt under Sections 24, 25, 26, and 28 -One person can admit to their wrongdoing before the honourable judge in a courtroom trial. This honest and sincere admission by the accused can serve as valuable evidence in the legal proceedings. Various sections such as 163(1), 163(2), 164(1), 164(2), 164(4), 281, and 463 of the C.r.p.c. cover this topic. The right to privacy in conversations is protected by sections 122, 124, 126, and 129. Communications between spouses are considered private and cannot be forced to be revealed. But there are some exceptions outlined in the sections that specify when disclosure may be required. Section 122 permits disclosure only with approval from the individual involved or their legal representative, except in cases involving married individuals or when one spouse is being charged with a crime against another person. In Section 124, official communications are discussed. Sections 126 and 129 cover the client-attorney relationship. Section 129 has an exception unless the attorney agrees to serve as a witness, which scenario he could be required to disclose any relevant communications in order to clarify his testimony, but

not others.

v.Provision under Code of Criminal Procedure

The [C.R.P.C. in India]^[13] provides numerous provisions for the rights of accused individuals. These include the privilege of being present at a trial, which is granted by Sections 273 and 279 of the Constitution. When someone is accused of a crime in India, they have certain legal protections, such as the ability to frame accusations, enter a not guilty plea, have their case heard in public, and the right to stay silent.

The right to protection against double jeopardy is also protected, with no person being punished more than once for the same offence. The Central or State Government's prior sanction is necessary in order to receive sanction prior to prosecution for specific offences. The right to privacy of a woman accused is also protected, with amendments made to current Criminal Procedure Code provisions.

In addition to having a fair trial, being released on probation, being able to represent themselves against the imposition of punishment, being released on bail, taking advantage of the statute of limitations, and being able to call and question witnesses in their defence, accused women also have the right to be freed from unjust arrest or detention.

The Code of Criminal Procedure in India provides numerous rights for accused individuals, including the right to be present during a trial, the right to defend oneself, the entitlement to be freed on probation, the right to represent against punishment, be released on bail, make the most of the statute of limitations by presenting and questioning defence witnesses.

Legal framework at global level for protection of Human Rights of accused

person.

i.Analysis of relevant treaties and conventions

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) are important international mechanisms for human rights that protect accused persons in the criminal justice system. “The ability of ideas to transform the world is embodied in the power of the Universal Declaration. It motivates us to keep up the fight to guarantee that everyone may live in freedom, equality, and dignity"^[14]. The UDHR outlines fundamental principles such as the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and an effective remedy. The ICCPR, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966, guarantees specific rights to accused persons, including arbitrary arrest, legal representation, and the right to appeal. The Convention on the Prohibition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Policies (CAT) prohibits torture and other forms of ill-treatment, while the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) safeguards the individual's right to security and liberty. Additional regional or bilateral treaties supplement these international instruments with

further protections for accused persons.

ii.Impact of international standards on national legal systems

International human rights instruments significantly influence the standards of national legal systems for accused persons within the criminal justice system. They are often incorporated into domestic laws, requiring that nations conform their actions to international human rights norms. National courts often interpret and apply these treaties, promoting consistency and coherence between national legal systems and international norms. International agreements on human rights can also serve as catalysts for legal reform and legislative action, allowing states to amend existing laws or enact new legislation to uphold commitments made under international human rights law. Oversight mechanisms, capacity building, and public awareness are also essential in promoting cooperation and dialogue between states. These instruments contribute to the progress of human rights and the protection of individuals’ rights in criminal proceedings worldwide.

National and international standards for ensuring a fair trial

“Due process rights are fundamental principles in the criminal justice system, ensuring fair treatment and protection of individuals. These rights are enshrined in national legal systems and international standards, aiming to prevent arbitrary detention, ensure fair trials, and uphold the rule of law”^[15]. Key principles include the presumption of innocence, the right to legal representation, right to a fair trial, the right to be quiet and against self- incrimination, and procedural safeguards. The assumption of innocence places the burden of proof on the prosecution, while legal representation ensures access to competent legal advice and effective defence. Procedural safeguards protect accused persons’ rights, such as timely information, speedy trials, appeals, and double jeopardy.

International Standards for Ensuring a Fair Trial:

The UDHR, ICCPR, and ICC all uphold the principle of fair trial rights, as outlined in Article 10 and Article 6. The ECHR guarantees the right to a fair trial through Article 6, while the ICC Statute establishes fair trial rights for individuals accused of international crimes, including legal representation, public trial, and the right to confront witnesses. These international legal frameworks ensure equal treatment and the preservation of human rights.

Comparing National and International Standards:

National legal systems may differ in how they guarantee fair trial rights, but international standards offer a universal guide for ensuring due process and safeguarding individuals’ rights in the criminal justice system. Both national and international standards highlight important principles like the assumption of innocence, the right to legal representation, the right to a fair trial, and procedural protections against unjust detention and misuse of authority. It is under the purview of national legal frameworks. to establish laws and practices that respect global norms and uphold the values of due process in their respective areas. Organisations like the United Nations and regional human rights courts oversee adherence to fair trial rights and offer guidance to guarantee that national legal systems meet global norms.

Access to Legal Representation

In India:

The Indian Constitution recognizes the fundamental right to legal assistance under Article 39A. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 establishes legal services authorities at national, state, and district levels to provide free legal aid. The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)^[16] coordinates and monitors legal aid programs across India, promoting access to justice for marginalised groups. Legal aid clinics provide legal assistance and advice, while panel lawyers provide pro bono or subsidised legal representation.

In United States:

In the United States, accused persons can access legal aid through public defender services, pro bono representation, and legal aid organisations. Public defenders provide free representation to indigent defendants, while pro bono representation is provided by private attorneys. Legal aid organisations offer legal advice, representation, and advocacy to low income individuals, including accused persons. Funding from federal and state governments, private donations, and grants support the provision of legal services to accused persons.

Comparative Analysis Between Indian and United States access to legal

representation:

The United States and India both have legal aid systems for accused persons, with varying scopes of coverage and eligibility criteria. India’s legal aid system is primarily funded by the government, while the United States’ legal aid organisations may receive funding from multiple sources. Delivery mechanisms vary, with India primarily funded by the authorities and the United States utilising various legal aid organisations. Ensuring quality legal representation is crucial for upholding human rights.

India and the United States both have a legal aid system established to safeguard the rights of individuals facing criminal charges. However, there are variations in how these systems are set up, funded, and operated. By comparing the two systems, we can pinpoint strengths and weaknesses to make necessary enhancements for better access to justice and safeguarding human rights for all accused individuals.

Pretrial Detention and Bail

National regulations and practices regarding pretrial detention

National regulations and practices regarding pre-trial detention are essential to protecting the

human rights of accused persons under the criminal justice system. “Pretrial detention refers

to the period of time when individuals are held in custody pending trial, before being convicted or acquitted of the charges against them. While pretrial detention is sometimes necessary to ensure public safety or prevent flight, it must be conducted in accordance with international human rights standards to safeguard the honour and privileges of accused persons.Here are some key aspects of national regulations and practices regarding pretrial detention, with a focus on ensuring human rights.

Pretrial detention is a legal process that involves appointing a judge to a person’s trial. It is based on principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality, and should abide by international human rights treaties such as the Nelson Mandela Rules, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The presumption of innocence is emphasised, and pretrial detention should only be used sometimes it's essential to achieve legitimate objectives. Judicial oversight is essential to prevent arbitrary detention and ensure that decisions are based on legal criteria and evidence. Procedural Safeguards, such as legal representation and timely communication, are also essential.

Alternatives to pretrial detention, such as bail, recognizance, electronic monitoring, and community supervision, can help reduce its impact on accused persons and their families”^[17] . Ensuring accused individuals' human rights within the justice system as a whole necessitates the implementation of national legislation and procedures pertaining to pre-trial detention. One way that nations can preserve the presumption of innocence, avoid arbitrary detention, and protect the rights and integrity of accused individuals awaiting trial is by upholding legality, vitality, and proportionality principles; offering judicial oversight as well as procedural safeguards; and encouraging alternatives to detention.

Role of Judiciary in protection of human rights of Accused person

Cases involving protection of human rights of accused persons under criminal justice system

in India.

In the case of Nandini Sathpathy v. P.L. Dani 1978 608^[18], it was established that it is illegal to coerce statements from the accused and that the accused is entitled to remain silent during questioning or investigation.

In the case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal^[19], The Supreme Court issued guidelines that must be followed in all arrests or detentions. These guidelines specify that the arresting authority must have accurate and visible identification, including their name tags and designation. The arrest memo should be signed by the arrestee and a family member, and the family or friend must be notified of the arrest. The arrestee should also be allowed to meet with their lawyer during interrogation, although not continuously. It was suggested that the rights and privileges afforded to the accused may not always

be justified and could potentially disrupt the collective psyche of society. Take, for instance, the case of Ajmal Amir Kasab v. The State of Maharashtra^[20]. Was it truly necessary for Kasab to undergo a trial in court when the crime was committed so brazenly and he was caught red-handed? Kasab, being a non-Indian citizen, was not entitled to the same constitutional rights as native citizens, yet he posed a clear threat to the nation and had already caused harm. Why then, was he granted the same privileges as any other accused individual in India.

The Indian court ensured that his rights as a person were respected and provided him with legal assistance for his defence, even though it was clear that he was guilty. It took many years for a terrorist like him to be executed in India. Our laws seemed hesitant to punish a terrorist who caused the deaths of hundreds of innocent people in a single night. The extent to which Ajmal Kasab's rights were upheld raises questions. In cases where the accused is clearly the criminal, the legal system should limit the privileges granted for a fair trial. Court sessions should focus solely on allowing the accused to defend themselves.

Ajmal Kasab’s case highlights the need for a win-win situation for accused rights in the Indian court system. While the majority agrees that accused rights should be confined according to cases, the reality of this is not always clear. The court’s decision to grant or denying rights is often influenced by prosecution and defence lawyers, who might not always take action truthfully. While legal aid may be justified in cases where accused individuals cannot afford lawyers, it might be unjust to people who are unable to afford them. The Indian legal system should be liberal but not weak, and special rare occasions should be marked for limiting accused rights. The not guilty until proven fact approach may be beneficial for majority citizens, but in cases of terrorism, it may be challenging to present the accused as not guilty.

Challenges in holding governments accountable for violations

“The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a crucial mechanism in holding governments accountable for human rights violations in the criminal justice system. However, it faces several challenges, including political will, impunity, judicial independence, legal barriers, lack of access to justice, limited international legal mechanisms, political and diplomatic considerations, and lack of transparency and information. Political will is a key challenge, as governments may be reluctant to acknowledge or address human rights abuses, especially when perpetrated by state actors or security forces. Legal barriers and immunities, such as sovereign immunity can impede accountability mechanisms. Access to justice is also a challenge, as victims often face financial constraints, intimidation, and lack of legal representation.

Challenges in harmonising domestic laws with international norms

The UDHR, ICCPR, and ICC all uphold the principle of fair trial rights, as outlined in Article 10 and Article 6. The ECHR guarantees the right to a fair trial through Article 6, while the ICC Statute establishes fair trial rights for individuals accused of international crimes, including legal representation, public trial, and the right to confront witnesses. These international legal frameworks ensure equal treatment and protection of human rights.

1. Fair Trials,The Right to a fair trial, available at: <https://www.fairtrials.org/right-fair-trial> accessed at 13th April 2024

2. What are Human Rights? (Equality and Human Rights Commission, available at: <https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights/what-are-human-rights> accessed at 13th April 2024

3. The Constitution of India art. 21 (Const. India)

4. The Constitution of India art. 20(1) (Const. India).

5. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597

6. Paramanand Katara v. Union of India, 1989 SC 2039

7. Hussainara Khatoon (5) v. State of Bihar, (1980) I SCC 108:1980 SCC(Cri) 50;

8. Article 14 of the Constitution of India, (Wikipedia, 28th June 2020) available at: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_14_of_the_Constitution_of_India> accessed at 14th  April2024

9. The Constitution of India art. 20 (Const. India)

10. The Constitution of India art. 21 (Const. India)

11. The Constitution of India art. 20 (Const. India)

12. The Indian Evidence Act (Ind. Evidence Act 1872).

13. The Code of Criminal Procedure commonly called Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is the main legislation on procedure for administration of substantive criminal law in India. It was enacted in 1973 and came into force on 1 April 1974

14. UDHR, available at : <https://www.ohchr.org/en/universal-declaration-of-human-rights > accessed on 14th April 2024

15. WILL KENTON, What is Due Process Rights?, Investopedia , available at:  < https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/due-process.asp> accessed on 14th April 2024

16. Nalsa, available at : <https://nalsa.gov.in/ > accessed on 14th April 2024

17. Pre Trial Detention, Fair Trials, available at : <https://www.fairtrials.org/campaigns/pre-trial-detention/  > accessed on 14th April 2024

18. Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani, (1978) 2 SCC 424:1978 SCC (Cri) 236:1978 Cri LJ 968

19. D.K. Basu Versus State of West Bengal (1997 (1) SCC 416)

20. Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 1