LI Network
Published on: 14 September 2023 at 19:20 IST
The Delhi High Court has emphasized the significance of safeguarding witnesses in criminal cases, stating that the actions of accused individuals threatening witnesses strike at the core of witness protection.
The court’s remarks came during its consideration of a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by the State, seeking the reversal of an order issued by a Sessions Judge related to an FIR registered under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA).
The Sessions Judge had dismissed an application to summon and examine six witnesses. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, presiding over a single bench, delivered the judgment on September 14, 2023.
The court emphasized, “It is crucial to highlight that the allegations against the respondents are that they were engaging in the act of threatening the witnesses of the case in question even while being lodged within the confines of jail. Such actions strike at the core of the protection of witnesses who are the eyes and ears of the judicial system and are the only means of reaching a just decision in a case and establishing the guilt of an accused.”
The court recognized the potential ramifications of threats to witnesses, especially when these individuals are protected by the law in criminal cases. Such threats, even from within prison walls, can directly impact the ability of courts to reach fair decisions and bring wrongdoers to justice.
The court affirmed that a witness under threat may not be able to provide truthful testimony, jeopardizing the pursuit of justice.
In this case, the prosecution sought to introduce evidence from witnesses who could attest to the accused individuals’ conduct in threatening protected witnesses while incarcerated.
The court believed that dismissing the petition would result in a miscarriage of justice, as it would hinder the presentation of crucial evidence necessary to decide the case.
The court asserted, “This Court is of the opinion that every case is a quest for finding the truth and must adhere to the established procedures of law. Section 311 of the CrPC is of utmost importance as it allows courts to uncover the truth in an adversarial system of adjudication.”
The court concluded that the present petition should be allowed, subject to certain conditions, including the timely examination of witnesses and providing statements and documents to the defense in advance to ensure effective cross-examination.