All parties involved, including the accused, the victims, and society at large, must be treated fairly in a trial that has as its primary goal discovering the truth. In a criminal prosecution, everyone has a right to a fair trial. "Fair trial" involves opportunities for her to show her innocence that is appropriate and allowed by the law.

A vital right is the ability to provide evidence in support of the defence. Denial of that privilege in a criminal case equates to a denial of a fair trial. "Fair trial" involves opportunities for her to show her innocence that is appropriate and allowed by the law. A vital right is the ability to provide evidence in support of the defence.

Denying such a right in a criminal case entail denying the right to a fair trial. Protection for the convicts is provided by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. There are several principles of impartial trial which will be discussed further. Every convict has a right to a fair trial. There are several articles and sections which govern this right. A fair trial is very important for the protection of Human Rights.

Many people suffered and are suffering due to the unfair trials. Unfair trials effects deeply a person's rights, mental health and reputation. The right to a fair trial also comes under the protection of human rights. Unfair trials are a violation of Human rights. There are different provisions in our Indian law which protect these rights. Free legal should also be provided to the people. A speedy trial is a right of every accused.

Introduction
In a trial with the primary purpose of learning the truth, all parties concerned, including the accused, victims, and society at large, must be treated equally. Everyone has the right to a fair trial in criminal prosecution. Denying the accused fair trial results in injustice for them, the victim, and society.

A defendant has the right to a fair trial. Under our Constitution and international treaties and conventions, the right to a fair trial is a fundamental human right. Without a fair trial, innocent individuals are convicted, which undermines the basics of the rule of law and the public agrees with the justice gadget. The right to a fair trial is assured using Article 6 of the Human Rights Act. The rule of law makes sure the management of justice refers to the fair trial of convicts.

A fair trial affords the convict with fair and suitable possibilities to reveal his or her innocence. The maximum essential component of the felony gadget is that an impartial judge treats all parties similarly. So, let's take the reference of the case Mrs Kalyani Baskar vs Mrs M. S. Sampoornam[1]

Hon'ble Apex Court concluded "fair trial" includes truthful and right opportunities allowed by way of law to prove her innocence. Adducing proof in support of the defence is a treasured proper. In a criminal case, denial of that right manner is a denial of a fair trial. Without fair trials, innocent people are convicted, and the rule of law of regulation and public religion inside the justice system collapse.

It is a critical position of any authorities to preserve law and order on behalf of the complete society. Within the fight against crime and delinquency, the state and its officers cannot, underneath any instances, abandon the decency of country-wide behaviour and lodge to extra-legal techniques for the cause of detecting crimes or maybe criminals. Even the rights of the accused are sacred in a democratic society.

Internationally right to a fair trial is recognised as a fundamental right and everyone should respect it. In Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and ors. v/s. The state of Gujarat and ors[2] The Supreme Court of India stated that "everyone has an innate right to be treated fairly in a criminal prosecution." Denial of a fair trial is an injustice to both the accused and the victim, as well as to society.

A fair trial would imply a trial before an impartial judge, a fair prosecutor, and a judicially calm setting. A fair trial is one in which bias or prejudice for or against the accused, the witness, or the cause under trial is eradicated."

Research Methodology
The current study has used secondary sources of information to analyse the right to a fair trial under Indian laws. Journals, papers and websites of various governmental and non-governmental agencies and organisations are an example of secondary data. In this current study, doctrinal research methodology has been used.

Review of literature

1. General Principles of Fair Trial, Sri T. Mllikarjuna Rao, VI - ADDL, District Judge, Machilipatnam.
   In this paper, the writer has discussed the principles of a fair trial with some important case laws. The writer of this paper is the district judge of Machilipatnam. There are several other topics like the prohibition of double jeopardy, the presumption of innocence and many more topics related to a fair trial that are discussed.
    
2. Right to a fair trial, the paper by Y. Srinivasa Rao, M.A (English)., B.Ed., LL.M., Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Proh. & Excise), Srikakulam
   In this paper written by Y. Srinivasa Rao has discussed the right to a free trial in detail. This paper is an acritical analysis of this right by the writer. The topics of discussion are impartial judgements, the principle of a fair trial, trial to final judgement, investigation to trial stages, arrest and pre-trial detention. The writer has discussed these topics in a detailed manner.
    
3. Critical analysis of the right to a fair trial in India, Author: Mitali Upadhyay, Chanakya Law College Kumaun University
   This article is written by Mitali Upadhyay. In this article, the author has discussed the right to a fair trial under Indian laws. She has discussed the laws under which the right to a fair trial is governed. The author has also discussed the Uniform Civil Code. She has also discussed the importance of the right to free legal aid and speedy trials. Further, she discussed the relation between the right to a free trial and human rights.

Fair Trial

Without a fair trial, harmless people are convicted, which undermines the fundamentals of the guideline of regulation and public belief within the justice system. The right to a fair trial is guaranteed by using Article 6 of the Human Rights Act. The guideline of law ensuring the management of justice refers to the fair trial of convicts. A fair trial presents the convict with truthful and appropriate opportunities to reveal his or her innocence.

The most vital thing about the prison machine is that an independent choice treats all events similarly. The proper to truthful Trial is one of the cornerstones of a simply society. Without fair trials, innocent human beings are convicted and the guideline of regulation and public religion within the justice device collapses. It's far a key function of any government to Preserve law and order on behalf of the complete society.

Inside the war on crime and delinquency, the state and its officials cannot on any account forsake, the decency of nation behaviour and have recourse to greater legal techniques for the Sake of detection of crimes or even criminals. In a democratic society, even the rights of the accused are sacrosanct. The proper fair trial way that People may be positive that system might be honest and positive, it prevents authorities from abusing their powers.

The proper a fair trial has been identified the world over as a fundamental human right and nations are required to respect it. In Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and ors. Vs. The state of Gujarat[3] and ors The Supreme Court of India stated that "everyone has an innate right to be treated fairly in a criminal prosecution." Denial of a fair trial is an injustice to both the accused and the victim, as well as to society.

A fair trial would imply a trial before an impartial judge, a fair prosecutor, and a judicially calm setting. A fair trial is one in which bias or prejudice for or against the accused, the witness, or the cause under trial is eradicated."

In The Indian Constitution Right To A Fair Trial Is A Fundamental Right

Article 21 of the Indian constitution affords safety to the convicts. It says no man or woman will be disadvantaged of his existence and personal liberty except to the manner established through law and it adds the fine of lifestyles, proper to stay with human dignity, right to livelihood is the primary issue of man or women life. It provides the right to an affordable, honest, and simply a trial.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[4], the right to life, according to the Supreme Court, includes both the right to a bodily existence and the right to live in dignity. The human right to a fair trial also includes the right to records and the right to records that, if used against him, will prevent him from having a fair chance to defend himself. In the case P. Ramachandra Rao v. the State of Karnataka (2002)[5]

The Court found that Sections 309, 311 and 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure guarantee the right to a quick trial. The Criminal Procedure Code's Section 482 and the Constitution's Articles 226 and 227 provide for the use of the High Court to request the proper remedy and instructions. The basic right to a speedy and fair trial is the main subject of Article 21. Sec 243 CRPC: evidence for the defence, it is compulsory at a part of the trial court docket to trouble procedure while the accused seeks summoning of any witnesses or production of any report in his protection.

Principles Of A Fair Trial

• Adversary system
  This method acknowledged that all parties had equal rights and opportunities. In addition, the law requires the judiciary to take on a much more active and constructive role than that of a simple referee in the struggle between the prosecutor-state and the suspect individual.
  
  The court, not the prosecution, will choose the charge against the suspect after taking the case's circumstances into account. A lawyer cannot leave the case without the court's permission. In Himanshu v. State of MP[6] two cases, the Apex Court argued that under the concept of a "free trial," the Code was not granted to the parties.
  
  The court also had reasons to believe that the organisation or examiner in question was not acting necessarily. As a result, the court decided to exercise its authority under sections 311 and 165 of the Code of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to call witnesses and gather the necessary information to uphold equity.
   
• Presumption of innocence
  In State of U.P. v. Naresh and Ors[7] every accused person is assumed innocent unless their guilt is established, the Supreme Court said. Subject to statutory restrictions, the presumption of innocence is a human right. In India, criminal law is based on the aforementioned idea.
  
  In Kali Ram v. State of H. P[8]., the Supreme Court observed "it is no doubt that wrongful acquittals are undesirable and shake the confidence of the people in the judicial system, much worse; however, is the wrongful conviction of an innocent person. The consequences of the conviction of an innocent person are far more serious and its reverberations cannot be felt in a civilized society."[9]
   
• Independent, impartial and competent judge
  The most crucial component of a fair criminal trial is having an independent, unbiased, and capable judge preside over the proceedings. The Code has established a division between the executive and judicial branches, which would guarantee the independent operation of the judiciary free from any allegations of executive interference or control. Every convicted person has a legal right to an independent and impartial tribunal.
  
  In Shyam Singh v. State of Rajasthan 1973 CriLJ 441, 1972 WLN 165, the court pointed out that the issue is not whether prejudice influenced the decision. The fundamental question is whether any circumstances would lead a litigant to rationally believe that a judicial officer's prejudice must have worked against him in the case's ultimate result.
   
• Expeditious trial
  According to Article 21 of the Constitution, the applicant has an unalienable fundamental right to a speedy trial. The main goals of a speedy trial are to:
  
  1. guarantee the accused's right to a speedy trial,
  2. swiftly resolve criminal cases following the public interest, and
  3. make sure that resources are used efficiently.

The doctrine of double jeopardy under Article 20 (2)
This theory states that a person cannot be exhausted more than once for the same offence or based on the same circumstances for another offence even if they are fatigued and not guilty of any offence. Both section 300 of the law and Article 20(2) of the constitution contain significant inclusions of this philosophy.

A second or subsequent trial that violates the higher than doctrine would result in unfair persecution of the suspect, even if it were true, and is forbidden by both the constitution and the code. In the S.A. Venkatraman V. Union of India case, The Enquiry Commissioner's process was not sufficient to constitute a commission for a crime, according to the Supreme Court. It had been intended that the truth-finding process would lead to the government taking action against the appellant. It cannot be said that the person has been charged.

The Hearing Ought To Be In Open Court

The hearing should take place in public. A public hearing in an open court is required for a fair trial. The Code's Section 327 provides for open court, which is often available to the entire public. Section 327 mandates that every location where the court is in charge must be an accessible open space for the public.

An outstanding tool for building public confidence in the organization's reasonability, solid judgement, and fair-mindedness is a public trial in open court. In the case of Naresh Sridhar Mirajkar V. State of Maharashtra AIR 1967 SC 1, The right to an open trial should never be denied, according to the supreme court, unless there are extraordinary circumstances. The High Court has the inherent authority to keep proceedings or a portion of a procedure secret or to forbid the publication of certain parts of its proceedings.[10]

Section 479

1. No judge or magistrate shall attempt or commit for trial, without the consent of the higher court, any matter in which he is a party or otherwise personally engaged.
    
2. No appeal against a decision or order a judge or a magistrate made or issued himself shall be heard.
    
3. Transfer of the case to ensure an impartial trial. Under Section 199(1)c, a magistrate has the authority to order the declaration of any offence if he knows of the conduct of the offence. However, in such a circumstance, the suspect should be informed that he is entitled to have the matter handled by a different magistrate before any evidence is collected (see Section 191)
   
   Second, the high court may, according to the provisions of section 407, require that any offence be investigated or tried by an alternative competent court if it seems to it that no good and impartial investigation or trial can be conducted in any criminal court subordinate to it.

(ii) that any specific case or class of cases be transferred to the other judicature from a court under its authority. Similar to this, Sections 406 and 408 grant the Supreme Court the power to transfer causes to the session court.

Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witness

When witnesses testify under oath and are subject to cross-examination, their testimony may become more credible. Although the burden of proof rests entirely with the prosecution and the accused is not required by law to present evidence to support his innocence, a criminal trial in which the accused is barred from presenting evidence to refute the prosecution's case or to establish any unique defences that may be available to him cannot, by any standard, be deemed fair or just.

Right Of A Free Legal Aid

The need for a fair trial includes giving the accused the chance to select his attorney and, in some circumstances, obligating the state to do so. A Welfare State owes its inhabitants the provision of free legal assistance to those with little financial resources, according to the Law Commission of India's 14th Report. The Directive Principles of Establish Policy, which are reflected in Article 39 A of the Constitution, further state the right to be represented by a lawyer that flows from Article 22(1) of the Constitution.

Speedy Trial

A swift trial is required to win the public's trust in the legal system. Justice that is delayed results in needless harassment. According to Section 309(1), "in every inquiry or trial, the proceedings shall be held as expeditiously as practicable, and in particular, when the examination of witnesses has once begun, such examination shall continue from day to day until all witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Court finds that the continuance of such examination beyond the following day is necessary for reasons to be recorded."[11]

Suggestions:

1. Because the accused has been charged with a crime, the court is not allowed to assume anything negative about him.
2. He is required to base his decision exclusively on the trial's evidence.
3. It is a well-established rule that when reviewing an acquittal ruling, an appeal court must take into account all of the material on file to determine whether the trial court's conclusions were erroneous or otherwise unsupportable.
4. The three pillars of a fair trial are "Equality, Justice, and Liberty," which are acknowledged in India's judicial system.
5. Both the wealthy and the "lowly and lost" have equal access to court in general and the criminal justice system in particular.
6. This core value of a fair trial forms the basis of the International Covenants and is enshrined in both the Indian Constitution and the criminal statutes that define India's criminal justice system.

Conclusion
The right to have a case heard by a judge who is qualified, independent, and unbiased is protected by Indian law under current international legal norms. Everyone must be treated equally before the court. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial before a lawfully created, independent court.

A fair trial must not be delayed excessively, and this is a key need. Article 21 of the Constitution's guarantee of a fast trial applies to all phases of the legal process, including investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision, and retrial. A criminal conviction cannot rely on the testimony of witnesses whose cross-examination conflicts with their testimony during the trial. Briefly presented is the fundamental idea underlying a fair trial.

In Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2010) 6 SCC 1 A well-supported decision decreases the likelihood of an appeal and the workload on the courts. Evidence must be evaluated logically and impartially. Every criminal trial must have a far greater degree of probability of guilt—nearly a certainty—and the accused must be given the benefit of the doubt if there is even a remote possibility that he is innocent.

Every single person in our country has a right to equality, liberty, and justice, which are the three main themes of our preamble. Equal access to justice and essential principles of a fair trial are guaranteed by the criminal justice system and the constitution. Criminal procedure is characterised by a fair trial, and the court must provide the accused with fair and appropriate chances to prove their innocence. Every accused person has a basic right to a fair trial.

People start to develop faith in the judicial system when they believe in the idea of a fair trial. Each of the aforementioned requirements must be satisfied to guarantee that there are no biases present during the trial. In addition to national legislation, several international treaties also protect these rights. Therefore, the idea of a fair trial serves as the foundation for all procedures.

End-Notes:

1. Mrs. Kalyani Baskar vs Mrs. M. S. Sampoornam, (2007) 2 SCC 258
2. Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors, (2006) 3 SCC 374
3. Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, [2004] 4 SCC 158
4. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
5. P. Ramachandra Rao v. the State of Karnataka, (1992) 1 SCC 225
6. Himanshu vs State of MP, AIR 2008 SC 1943
7. State of U.P. V. Naresh and Ors, (2001) 4 SCC 324
8. Kali Ram v. State of H.P., [ (1973) 2 SCC 808]
9. Y. Srinivasa Rao, Right to fair trial, district ecourts, 2-3,https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/Excise%20material.pdf
10. Mitali Upadhyay, Critical analysis of right to a fair trial in India, ISSN: 2582-4171, LexLife Journal of Law and Governance, 1-8, (2022)
11. Sri T. Mllikarjuna Rao, General principles of fair trial, districts ecourts, 8, (2018), https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/1st%20Topic.pdf