SC Rulings regarding hostile witnesses

Yesterday, the Supreme Court passed two important judgements that may have a strong bearing in the way many murder cases are solved in the country.

It is no fact that for every high profile murder case involving a powerful person or his/her son/daughter/nephew/niece, there are forces that pressure the witness into keeping mum or retracting their statements to the police. We all know about Jessica Lall's case because the media chose to latch onto this one case from the millions such cases that are languishing in the dusty corners of Indian courts.

Despite all the call for credible witness protection plans, the Government is still moving with the classic government pace, very slowly and very unsurely. Some sort of witness protection plan was to have been passed in this current parliament session, but instead the politicians chose to hold giant orgies with each other and with the suspension of the entire session, the witness protection plan was left hanging. In case you dont know what orgy I am talking about, its that 'office of profit' circus show, which ended with one grand "sacrifice" on the part of the Godmother of Congress. However, there are indications that the Parliament may reconvene, and hopefully this bill will be passed without delay.

Coming back to the topic at hand, the Supreme Court had made two important points in its ruling: one, the trial courts can base their conviction on the initial statement of the witnesses and can discard the subsequent statements after they turn hostile. Secondly, the courts do have the power to prosecute hostile witnesses as well.

This ruling, as opposed to popular belief, is not in response to the Jessica Lall case, but in fact, to a 17 year old murder case from Ujjain where two brothers saw a man and his accomplice assault another person, and were the prime witnesses for the case. The duo however, retracted their earlier statement saying the police made them say it under duress, and in fact later appeared as witnesses for the accused! While reversing the MP High Court's order acquitting the accused, the SC termed the lower court's decision as 'perverse'.

I am glad that the courts have finally attempted to not be taken for granted anymore. Hostile witnesses become what they are because there are forces in the society that have a greater power of hurting the witness than of the state protecting him/her. When the state is unable to protect those who are vital in the delivery of justice, the courts must take it upon themselves to create an environment where such subversion of justice is resisted.

Deal firmly with witnesses turning hostile: Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the Sessions and High Courts to deal firmly with witnesses turning hostile or giving false evidence in criminal cases. In such cases, the courts should not acquit the accused.

A Bench of Justice H.K. Sema and Justice A.R. Lakshmanan on Friday said: "Once a witness is examined as a prosecution witness, he cannot be allowed to perjure himself by resiling from the testimony given in court on oath by filing an affidavit stating that whatever he had deposed before the court was not true and was done so at the instance of the police."

Writing the judgment, Justice Sema said that when such frivolous and vexatious petitions were filed, the Judge would not be powerless. He should use his discretionary powers and refuse relief on the ground that it was made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice.

The judgment, in a murder case, assumes significance in the context of the accused in the Jessica Lall and other high profile and sensitive cases being acquitted because the witnesses turned hostile or gave false evidence.

Two witnesses were initially examined as prosecution witnesses in the murder case. The trial court awarded life sentence to the accused. In an appeal before the Madhya High Court after about five years, the witnesses deposed in favour of the accused, saying their earlier evidence was given due to coercion, threat and police tutoring. The High Court acquitted the accused only on the ground that the witnesses had turned hostile and given false evidence.
-------------------------------------------------

Jessica effect: Hostile witness plays safe

While retraction by prosecution witnesses led to the acquittal of all the high-profile accused in the Jessica murder case, the apex court on Friday refused to extend similar benefit to the accused in a murder case in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, because the prosecution witnesses turned hostile.

In the process, the Supreme Court made two things clear. First, trial courts can base conviction on the initial statement of a witness while discarding the diametrically opposite evidence given by him after turning hostile. And second, courts are not powerless to order prosecution of such a hostile witness who resiles from his statement given on oath.

Coming after a verdict by another Delhi court similar to the Jessica case, the apex court’s ruling in the Ujjain case shows that pending the enactment of a witness protection Act, the judiciary is already interpreting the existing law to deny advantages to the accused because of witnesses turning hostile.