As per case facts, a minor victim was raped and murdered. Accused No.1, a relative, was convicted of these offenses and sentenced to death; other accused were convicted for concealing ... evidence. Accused No.1 appealed, contending denial of fair trial due to lack of adequate legal representation throughout the proceedings, including crucial witness examinations and charge framing. Other accused challenged convictions, citing un-framed charges and insufficient evidence. The question arose whether the trial, marked by procedural infirmities regarding legal aid and counsel appointment, violated the constitutional right to a fair trial, particularly for a capital offense. Finally, the Court observed a clear miscarriage of justice, noting the accused was largely unrepresented during critical stages, counsel lacked preparation time, and legal aid was ineffective. All convictions and sentences were set aside. The case was remanded for a de novo trial from charge framing, with strict instructions to ensure effective and timely legal representation for all accused, emphasizing fair trial principles.