Delhi High Court: Co-accused cannot oppose plea for pardon to become approver

The Delhi High Court ruled that a co-accused has no right to oppose another accused's plea for pardon to become an approver. The court said the appropriate stage to challenge the approver's credibility is during trial through cross-examination

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has ruled that an accused has no right to oppose a plea by a co-accused seeking pardon by becoming an approver in a criminal case. Justice Jasmeet Singh stated that the accused instead has the opportunity to cross-examine the co-accused-turned-approver during trial to question the credibility of his testimony.

“The scheme of Section 306 CrPC does not confer a right to be heard on every co-accused. The grant of pardon is not an act which itself causes prejudice to the co-accused and does not by itself lead to their conviction,” the judgment dated July 4 said.

---

“The approver is rather to be examined at the stage of trial and then further cross-examined, before his/her testimony can become admissible evidence. The opportunity at the stage of trial to cross-examine the approver and impeach his/her credibility is sufficiently afforded to the co-accused. Thus, the only effective opportunity to the co-accused to question the reliability of the approver can be granted at the stage of trial,” explained the court.

The court was dealing with a plea by an accused company in a money laundering case, seeking recall of a 2024 order that granted approver status to another accused.

The applicant company contended that it was a necessary party in the matter and the order was passed without giving it an opportunity to be heard.

Terming the applicant’s apprehensions as “premature”, Justice Singh observed that the issue was earlier considered in another case by this high court as well as other high courts, and it has been held that the right of a co-accused arises only at the stage of trial and he has no right to ask for a hearing in the proceedings of pardon.

“The applicant and the other co-accused will have ample opportunity during the trial to challenge and cross-examine the approver, petitioner herein, and shake the credibility of his testimony,” the court said. “There is no procedural lapse or violation of the Principles of Natural Justice while passing the impugned Judgment. For the said reasons, the application is dismissed,” concluded the court.