Important articles and Judgments on witness protection

 

1) SC approves Witness Protection Scheme 2018

We, accordingly, direct that:

(i) This Court has given its imprimatur to the Scheme prepared by respondent No. 1 which is approved hereby. It comes into effect forthwith.

(ii) The Union of India as well as States and Union Territories shall enforce the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 in letter and spirit.

(iii) It shall be the ‘law’ under Article 141/142 of the Constitution, till the enactment of suitable Parliamentary and/or State Legislations on the subject.

(iv) In line with the aforesaid provisions contained in the Scheme, in all the district courts in India, vulnerable witness deposition complexes shall be set up by the States and Union Territories. This should be achieved within a period of one year, i.e, by the end of the year 2019. The Central Government should also support this endeavour of the States/Union Territories by helping them financially and otherwise.

In the Supreme Court of India

(Before A.K Sikri and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.)

Mahender Chawla  v. Union of India

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2016

Decided on December 5, 2018

Citation: 2018 SCC OnLine SC 2679

https://www.lawweb.in/2019/09/sc-approves-witness-protection-scheme.html

Print Page

A Policy Analysis of the Witness Protection Scheme 2018-explainer

 

1. The Witness as the "Eyes and Ears of Justice"

In the architecture of the Indian adversarial legal system, the witness serves as the fundamental pivot upon which the scales of justice balance. The integrity of oral testimony is not merely a procedural convenience; it is the primary strategic asset for any court engaged in the arduous process of uncovering factual truth. Within this framework, the witness acts as the medium through which facts—disputed or otherwise—are effectively conveyed to the judiciary, forming the backbone of the decision-making process.

Print Page

Important provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999

 1. Short title, extent and commencement.—(1) This Act may be called the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999.

 Received the assent of the Governor on 23rd April, 1999 and published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette Extraordinary, Part-IV, dated 24th April, 1999.

(2) It extends to the whole of the State of Maharashtra.

2. Definitions.—(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

(d) “continuing unlawful activity” means an activity prohibited by law for the time being in force, which is a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or more, undertaken either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such, syndicate in respect of which more than one charge-sheets have been field before a competent Court within the preceding period of ten years and that Court has taken cognizance of such offence;

Print Page

Supreme Court: The court Must direct the prosecution to give the statement of protected witness with his identity redacted as per S 207 of CRPC?

  Having said so, we also come to the order passed by the trial court on 11.09.2021 which has been cautiously worded. The order has not only permitted redaction of the address and particulars of the witnesses which could disclose their identities but has further observed as noted aforesaid that even other relevant paras in the statement which would disclose their occupation and identity could be redacted. Thus, a wide discretion has been given and that too for the Special Public Prosecutor to take a call. There could thus have hardly been a grievance raised by the prosecution in this regard. On query to the learned counsel for the respondent as to how this order can in any manner prejudice or have the propensity to disclose the identity of the witnesses or their families with the possibility of harm being caused to them, there has really been no answer. We believe that the order dated 11.09.2021 is both fair and reasonable for the prosecution and defence while protecting the witnesses and not depriving the defence of a fair trial with the disclosure of the redacted portion of the testimony under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. {Para 27}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.237 OF 2022 

WAHEED-UR-REHMAN PARRA Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

Coram: Sanjay Kishan Kaul; M.M. Sundresh, JJ. 

Author: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

Dated: February 25, 2022

Print Page

SC approves Witness Protection Scheme 2018

We, accordingly, direct that:

(i) This Court has given its imprimatur to the Scheme prepared by respondent No. 1 which is approved hereby. It comes into effect forthwith.

(ii) The Union of India as well as States and Union Territories shall enforce the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 in letter and spirit.

(iii) It shall be the ‘law’ under Article 141/142 of the Constitution, till the enactment of suitable Parliamentary and/or State Legislations on the subject.

(iv) In line with the aforesaid provisions contained in the Scheme, in all the district courts in India, vulnerable witness deposition complexes shall be set up by the States and Union Territories. This should be achieved within a period of one year, i.e, by the end of the year 2019. The Central Government should also support this endeavour of the States/Union Territories by helping them financially and otherwise.

In the Supreme Court of India

(Before A.K Sikri and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.)

Mahender Chawla  v. Union of India

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2016

Decided on December 5, 2018

Citation: 2018 SCC OnLine SC 2679

Print Page