Dr. Justice V.S. Malimath Report First pages - Ministry of Home Affairs

153
are paid allowances on the same day if the case is adjourned. Quite often more
than one witnesses is summoned to prove the same point, much of it being of a
formal character. The prosecutor may pay attention to reduce duplication of
evidence resulting in unnecessary waste of time of courts and expenses. The
evidence of Medical witnesses, Government scientific experts and Officers of
mint contemplated by Sections 291, 292 and 293 of the Code shall be tendered
as evidence in the form of Affidavits and the challenge to the same by the
opposite party shall be by means of a counter Affidavit. The Court may permit
an Affidavit in reply being filed by these experts. If the Court is satisfied that in
the interest of justice, examination of these witnesses is necessary, it shall as far
as possible be done through Video Conferencing. It is only if it is practicable
that the witnesses may be summoned for giving evidence before the Court.
Evidence of such witnesses should be recorded on priority basis and summoning
such experts again should be avoided. The DNA experts should be included in
sub section 4 of section 293 of the Code. This repeats again and again. No
concern is shown for the valuable time of the witness and the trouble he takes to
come to the court again and again to give evidence. Therefore there is need to
infuse sensitivity in the minds of the court and the lawyers about the hardship
and inconvenience which the witness suffers when the case is adjourned.
Therefore only such number of cases should be listed which can be taken on
that particular day so that the witness is not required to return only to come
again for giving evidence. The directions given from time to time that the trial
should proceed on day to day basis are not being followed. Time has now come
to hold the Judge accountable for such lapses. Appropriate remedial measures
through training and supervision may have to be taken in this behalf by the
respective High Courts.
11.5 The next aspect is about the way the witness is treated during trial.
As already stated the witness is entitled to be treated with courtesy when he
arrives for giving evidence. Similarly due courtesy should be shown to him
when he enters the court hall for giving evidence. The present practice is to
make the witness stand and give his
evidence from the place designated for
that purpose. Comfort, convenience and
dignity of the witness should be the
concern of the Judge. In the opinion of
the Committee the present practice must
be changed. A chair should be provided
for the witness and requested to take his
seat for giving evidence. The lawyer for
It is high time the Judges are
sensitised about the responsibility
to regulate cross examination so
as to ensure that the witness is not
ill-treated affecting his dignity
and honour.
the defence in order to demonstrate that the witness is not truthful or a reliable
person would ask all sorts of questions to him. When the questions are likely to
annoy, insult or threaten the witness, the Judge does not object and
often sits as a mute spectator. It is high time the Judges are sensitised about the