In a criminal trial, evidence was given in Tamil and English and the accused knew neither of the languages.  It was not explained to him in his own language.   He did not raise this objection during the trial, but he happened to be represented by a counsel who knew both Tamil and English. It was argued on his behalf that any conviction would be illegal as neither the trial proceedings were taken in a language understood by him nor were the proceedings interpreted to him so as to make him understand.  Decide.