New Delhi, Feb 25 (PTI)The Supreme Court on Friday said the trial courts can refuse to give statements made to the probe agencies by “protected witnesses” to the accused if they are satisfied that such disclosure could endanger witnesses and their family members.
The apex court, in its verdict, dealt with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and the National Investigation Agency Act to decide the legal course between the right of the accused to get documents for fair trial and the powers of the court to deny the same to safeguard the “protected witnesses” and their families.
A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M Sundresh said the concerned provisions of the statutes stand on a “different plane” as they are meant to safeguard the interests of witnesses and their families.
“On a conspectus of the …legal position and the limited contours of the facts required for determination of the issue, we are of the view that the provisions of Section 173(6) (power of police officer to urge Magistrate not to part with particular documents to accused) of the CrPC read with Section 44 of the UAPA and Section 17 of the NIA Act stand on a different plane with different legal implications as compared to Section 207 (Right of accused to get papers) of the CrPC,” it said.
“The objective of Section 44, UAPA, Section 17, NIA Act, and Section 173(6) is to safeguard witnesses. They are in the nature of statutory witness protection. On the court being satisfied that the disclosure of the address and name of the witness could endanger the family and the witness, such an order can be passed. They are also in the context of special provisions made for offences under special statutes,” Justice Kaul, writing the judgement, said.
The verdict came on an appeal of an accused, Waheed–ur–Rehman Parra, against the Jammu and Kashmir High Court’s decision in a 2020 terror-related case.
The High Court had set aside the Jammu trial court’s order asking the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to share redacted copies of the statements of five protected witnesses to the accused.
The apex court, while clarifying the legal position, found no fault with the trial court’s direction to provide redacted copies of the statement to the accused of preparing him for his defence without disclosing the identity of the protected witnesses.
“Having said so, we also come to the order passed by the trial court on …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…,” the verdict said.
The order of the trial court was 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, it said. PTI SJK SJK RKS RKS
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.