Whether so many Advocates of accused can be permitted to remain present in court in Rape trial in in-camera trial?

Before   this   Court,   argument   of   learned 
counsel   for   Respondent   No.2   that   unhealthy 
ambiance is tried to be created in the Court Hall 
at   the   time   of   evidence   by   letting   so   many 
Advocates   attend   only   because   they   have   signed 
Vakalatnama,   has   not   been   replied   to   by   the 
learned   counsel   for     Petitioner­Accused.   The 
Additional   Sessions   Judge   needs   to   keep   in   view 

provisions   of   Section   327(2)   of   the   Code   of 
Criminal Procedure, 1973, which has been inserted 
in 1983, providing that the inquiry into or trial 
of rape or offence under Section 376, Section 376 
A   to   376   E   of   the   Indian   Penal   Code   shall   be 
conducted In­Camera. The purpose and object of the 
law needs to be kept in view and it is necessary 

for   the   trial   Court   to   ensure   that   In­Camera 
proceeding   takes   place   in   its   letter   and   spirit. 
When   it   is   In­Camera   proceeding,   it   is   duty   of 
Court   to   ensure   that   Prosecutrix   is   given 
atmosphere which will encourage her to speak about 
the   incident   without   being   put   to   avoidable 
embarrassment.   The   evidence   can   be   recorded   in 
presence   of   both   sides,   permitting   the   counsel 
conducting   the   cross   examination   to   have 
assistance of say, one junior Advocate only of his 

choice.

BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                                     
     IN  THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 
CRIMINAL  REVISION  APPLICATION  NO.48  OF 2014
Dr. Suyog s/o Dinkarrao Vyas,

       VERSUS             
1) The State of Maharashtra,
2) Prosecutrix
   (for name see original Petition)  
                                ...
              CORAM:    A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.

   DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2014 
Citation;2014 CRLJ(NOC)444 Bom,2016 ALLMR(CRI)1042

Print Page