What Will the SC Do About Untruthful Witnesses in Criminal Trials?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a significant development, the Supreme Court has taken a firm stance against witnesses who mislead criminal trials. This article delves into the court's directives to uphold judicial integrity and protect witnesses from undue influence, ensuring that justice prevails.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court issues a warning to witnesses misleading trials.
- Trial courts are mandated to take strict action against dishonest testimonies.
- Witness protection is emphasized to prevent intimidation.
- The integrity of the judicial process is crucial for justice.
- Upcoming hearings are set for December 11.
New Delhi, Oct 23 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has issued a strong warning to witnesses who attempt to deceive trial proceedings in criminal cases, mandating that the trial court address such behaviors with serious consequences.
The court emphasized the need to maintain the integrity of the judicial process, with Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N.V. Anjaria stating: "If the trial court discovers that any witness has taken sides in their testimony without being honest with the court, the court shall take suo motu cognizance of such behavior and initiate action against them individually."
This statement was made following claims by senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, who represented the petitioner, stating that three private prosecution witnesses had turned hostile after the release of the accused/respondent no.2. Sanghi remarked that this situation "speaks volumes about the conduct of the respondent."
Senior advocate Mukta Gupta, defending the accused, strongly refuted these allegations. Nevertheless, the apex court expressed concern regarding potential influence on witnesses.
Justice Amanullah's Bench also underscored the importance of fairness, directing that the remaining official witnesses — two doctors and Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) officials — should provide their testimonies "under full police protection, ensuring that they are not intimidated or influenced in any way."
"Considering that all private witnesses have been examined, and only the two doctors and FSL officials remain, we instruct the learned Senior Advocate for the respondent no.1 (State) to guarantee that the remaining witnesses provide their testimonies under comprehensive police protection, free from intimidation or influence," the apex court declared.
It further mandated that these instructions be "communicated to the relevant witnesses prior to their depositions." The case is scheduled for further hearings on December 11.
Point of View
It is imperative to recognize the Supreme Court's proactive stance on ensuring the integrity of criminal trials. This ruling not only safeguards the judicial process but also reinforces the commitment to justice. The court’s emphasis on protecting witnesses from external influences showcases its dedication to maintaining fairness in legal proceedings.
NationPress
23/10/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What actions can the trial court take against untruthful witnesses?
The trial court can take suo motu cognizance of any misconduct and initiate individual actions against witnesses who are found to be dishonest.
How does the Supreme Court ensure witness protection?
The Supreme Court has directed that witnesses, especially official ones, record their testimonies under full police protection to prevent intimidation or influence.
What was the context of the Supreme Court's warning?
The warning arose from a situation where private prosecution witnesses turned hostile after the accused was released from custody, raising concerns about possible influence.
When is the next hearing for this case?
The matter is scheduled for further hearings on December 11.
Who were the justices presiding over this case?
The case was presided over by Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N.V. Anjaria.
