![]() ![]() has to be applied keeping in mind sound judicial principles to order payment of reasonable expenses.Īccused getting bail with ease - When influential accused get bail easily, it makes witnesses much more vulnerable and dissuades them from standing firm on their initial statement. Food Inspectorcase, the Kerala High Court held that the discretionary power vested in courts by s.312, Cr.P.C. This discourages witnesses, especially those who live in remote areas. ![]() says that " that subject to any rule made by State Government, any Criminal Court may, if it thinks fit, order payment, on the part of the Government, of reasonable expenses of any complainant or witnesses attending for the purpose of any enquiry trial or other proceeding before such Court under this Code." However, travel allowances provided to witnesses are generally meager and the payment is stalled for quite some time. Meager Allowances - Section 312 of Cr.P.C. aims to ensure the speedy conclusion of trials, however, it has not been very effective in achieving its aim. He went on to say that such treatment of witnesses leads citizens to become wary of getting involved in a judicial matter in the capacity of a witness, and ultimately, adversely affects the administration of justice. He observed how multiple adjournments are sought by advocates which often exhaust witnesses and force them to give up. State of Punjab recognized the plight of witnesses. Multiple Adjournments - Justice Wadhwa in the case of Swaran Singh v. Threats and absence of effective witness protection programmes are not the only reasons behind hostility of witnesses, the following are other prominent reasons. However, such questions can be disallowed by the court. Sometimes scandalous questions are directed towards the witness, simply to discredit them. Speaking against an influential accused can sometimes even lead to witnesses losing their lives, as was seen during the trials of Asaram. It is important to examine the reasons which more often than not, force a witness to turn hostile. However, it is not appropriate to shift the blame unilaterally to the witnesses. State of Rajasthan, a 'hostile witness' is a person "who is not desirous of telling the truth at the instance of one party calling him." The Bombay High Court recently termed the hostility of witnesses as " cancerous to the justice delivery system" in the case of Saraswati w/o Ganpat Landge v. When a witness backs out or tends to back out from his statement which was recorded by the police (or any other authority competent to do so), he is called a "hostile witness." As held in the case of Gura Singh v. The successful implementation of the scheme, however, is another story. For the longest period of time, India did not have any law concerning witness protection, and then, the Witness Protection Scheme was introduced in 2018. During the trial, however, most prosecution witnesses neither testified against the accused nor identified the accused's vehicle. Registrar, Delhi High Court (popularly known as the BMW hit and run case), the accused had allegedly mowed down six pedestrians while they were asleep. Unfortunately, instances of witnesses turning hostile, or not coming forward in the first place is not uncommon, especially in cases where the witness is required to testify against individuals who are influential. The court on Tuesday directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to provide protection to the witnesses of the Lakhimpur Kheri violence. Recently, the Supreme Court of India expressed surprise because only 23 eyewitnesses were traced amongst hundreds of gatherers in the Lakhimpur Kheri case. Witnesses have a major role to play in the criminal justice system. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |