State has definite role in protecting witnesses: Apex court.
The Supreme Court said immediate steps need to be taken to ensure protection of witnesses who often turn hostile, either due to threats or other corrupt practices, and said unless the witnesses are protected there will be rise in unmerited acquittals.
A division bench of Justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Madan B Lokur made these observations while deciding a case of dowry death wherein due to pressure even the family of the girl, including her mother, turned hostile.
“Time has become ripe to act on account of numerous experiences faced by the courts on account of frequent turning of witnesses as hostile, either due to threats, coercion, lures and monetary considerations at the instance of those in power, their henchmen and hirelings, political clouts and patronage and innumerable other corrupt practices ingeniously adopted to smother and stifle the truth and realities coming out to surface rendering truth and justice, to become ultimate casualties,” the bench observed while dismissing the plea of a husband on Tuesday.
“There comes the need for protecting the witness. Time has come when serious and undiluted thoughts are to be bestowed for protecting witnesses so that the ultimate truth is presented before the court and justice triumphs and that the trial is not reduced to a mockery,” the court ruled.
Asking the states to take the initiative in protecting the witnesses, the court said, “The state has a definite role to play in protecting the witnesses, to start with at least in sensitive cases involving those in power, who have political patronage and could wield muscle and money power, to avert trial getting tainted and derailed and truth becoming a casualty. As a protector of its citizens it has to ensure that during a trial in the court the witness could safely depose the truth without any fear of being haunted by those against whom he had deposed.”
The case dates back to 1987 when the victim Gowramma was married to Anjanappa. Her husband demanded dowry and got Rs5,000, a motor bike, one gold chain and clothes. But after marriage, he used to harass his wife for bringing more dowry from her parents. The harassment was both physical and mental.
On October 1991, there was a quarrel between the wife and husband after which he poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. Gowramma and she later succumbed to her burns. A case of dowry harassment was slapped on the husband. The trial court acquitted the husband saying the dying declaration was not a valid one. The acquittal was reversed in the high court which held the husband guilty and sentenced him to six years in imprisonment. Aggrieved by the high court ruling, husband approached the apex court.
Expressing shock over the fact that girl’s parents turned hostile during the proceedings, the court said, “Possibly these witnesses were bought over by the appellant. Such a conduct displays greed and lack of compassion. If they were threatened by the appellant and were forced to depose in his favour, it is a sad reflection on our system which leaves witnesses unprotected. The reasons why witnesses so frequently turn hostile need to be ascertained. There is no witness protection plan in place.”
Upholding high court’s decision, the court said, “Minor discrepancy at the time of recording of dying declaration creates no dent in the prosecution story which is, otherwise, substantiated by reliable evidence.”
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}