Dr. Justice V.S. Malimath Report First pages - Ministry of Home Affairs
Dr. Justice V.S. Malimath Report First pages - Ministry of Home Affairs
Dr. Justice V.S. Malimath Report First pages - Ministry of Home Affairs
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
25<br />
investigation and the prosecution in discovering truth. Exclusionary rules <strong>of</strong><br />
evidence hardly exist. Hearsay rules are unknown in this System. If the<br />
prosecutor feels that the case involves serious <strong>of</strong>fences or <strong>of</strong>fences <strong>of</strong> complex<br />
nature or politically sensitive matters, he can move the judge <strong>of</strong> instructions to<br />
take over the responsibility <strong>of</strong> supervising the investigation <strong>of</strong> such cases.<br />
2.6. To enable the Judge <strong>of</strong> instructions to properly investigate the case, he<br />
is empowered to issue warrants, direct search, arrest the accused and examine<br />
witnesses. The accused has the right to be heard and to engage a counsel in the<br />
investigation proceedings before the judge <strong>of</strong> instructions and to make<br />
suggestions in regard to proper investigation <strong>of</strong> the case. It is the duty <strong>of</strong> the<br />
judge <strong>of</strong> instructions to collect evidence for and against the accused, prepare a<br />
dossier and then forward it to the trial judge. The<br />
The accused is<br />
presumed to be<br />
innocent and it is the<br />
responsibility <strong>of</strong> the<br />
judge to discover the<br />
truth.<br />
accused is presumed to be innocent and it is the<br />
responsibility <strong>of</strong> the judge to discover the truth. The<br />
statements <strong>of</strong> witnesses recorded during<br />
investigation by the judge <strong>of</strong> instructions are<br />
admissible and form the basis for the prosecution<br />
case during final trial. Before the trial judge the<br />
accused and the victim are entitled to participate in<br />
the hearing. However the role <strong>of</strong> the parties is restricted to suggesting the<br />
questions that may be put to the witnesses. It is the Judge who puts the<br />
questions to the witnesses and there is no cross-examination as such. Evidence<br />
regarding character and antecedents <strong>of</strong> the accused such as previous conduct or<br />
convictions are relevant for proving the guilt or innocence <strong>of</strong> the accused.<br />
2.7. The standard <strong>of</strong> pro<strong>of</strong> required is the inner satisfaction or conviction <strong>of</strong><br />
the Judge and not pro<strong>of</strong> beyond reasonable doubt as in the Adversarial System.<br />
2.8. Another important feature <strong>of</strong> the Inquisitorial System is that in respect<br />
<strong>of</strong> serious and complex <strong>of</strong>fences investigation is done under the supervision <strong>of</strong><br />
an independent judicial <strong>of</strong>ficer__ the Judge <strong>of</strong> Instructions__ who for the<br />
purpose <strong>of</strong> discovering truth<br />
collects evidence for and<br />
against the accused.<br />
2.9. In evaluating the<br />
two systems we should not<br />
forget the basic requirement<br />
<strong>of</strong> fairness <strong>of</strong> trial. In<br />
Another important feature <strong>of</strong> the Inquisitorial<br />
System is that in respect <strong>of</strong> serious and<br />
complex <strong>of</strong>fences investigation is done under<br />
the supervision <strong>of</strong> an independent judicial<br />
<strong>of</strong>ficer__ the Judge <strong>of</strong> Instructions__ who for<br />
the purpose <strong>of</strong> discovering truth collects<br />
evidence for and against the accused.