Eliminate the hostility

Among the most important tasks Parliament must undertake is to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and eliminate, as far as possible, the problem of witnesses turning hostile.

The time has come to tackle the issue of perjury head on. A Supreme Court decision upholding the initial statement of a witness and discarding the diametrically opposite ‘hostile’ one at the time of the trial is yet another indicator that the time has come to fix the gaping hole that threatens to sink the administration of criminal justice. Among the most important tasks Parliament must undertake is to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and eliminate, as far as possible, the problem of witnesses turning hostile. Witness manipulation in the course of trial is so routine that it is the main reason for the derailing of many a prosecution case. Loopholes in the CrPC, especially in the recording of witness statements, must be plugged to ensure that criminal trials don’t end in a fiasco.

HT Image

The apex court’s most recent action was supported by the fact that the initial statements were recorded under oath by a magistrate. There is no reason why this shouldn’t be made the rule, at least for cases where the maximum sentence is of seven years or above. The 154th, and thereafter the 178th, report of the Law Commission had repeatedly made the plea to amend the law in this direction. Recognising the fact that this would require the recruitment of many more magistrates, the reports also held the suggestion that in the interim, statements recorded by the police be, as a rule, read out to the witnesses, signed by them, and copies immediately sent to the witnesses, the magistrate concerned and senior police officials. This would substantially eliminate the risk of witnesses reneging on their depositions and provide stronger ground to prosecute hostile witnesses.