Saturday 25 May 2013

Jessica Lall case: Perjury and witness protection again

The Delhi high court on Wednesday ordered model-turned-actor Shayan Munshi and ballistics expert Prem Sagar Manocha, witnesses in the Jessica Lall murder case who turned hostile, be tried for perjury under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court observed that Munshi’s backtracking had prima facie amounted to ‘helping the accused’. If found guilty the duo could face up to seven years in prison. The court’s observation is important as it may act as a deterrent for witnesses in future cases. There are previous instances where witnesses have backtracked. In 1999, Sanjeev Nanda driving his luxury car hit and killed six people, including three policemen. Later in court the sole survivor turned hostile stating that it could have been a truck that hit them. In the Best Bakery case, Zahira Sheikh, who was a key witness to the attack that killed 14 Muslims, repeatedly changed her statements prompting the courts to jail her for 15 months in total for perjury.
Shayan Munshi
Another, and important, aspect is the Delhi high court asking the Delhi government to come with a ‘witness protection policy’ within 10 weeks. Such a policy is important because trials prolong over a long period and witnesses, either through threats or inducements, change their stance in court. But this is not the first time the government has been asked by the judiciary to bring in an effective witness protection policy. In 2003, in the wake of the Nitish Katara case, the Delhi high court had issued guidelines for witness protection and in 2012 the Bombay high court, while passing a judgment on the Best Bakery case, pushed for an effective witness protection programme. While the law ministry has expressed its willingness to incorporate a witness protection mechanism into the criminal justice system, tangible action is yet to be seen. And that seems to be the issue stopping an effective witness protection programme — it is a legislative failure which no amount of judicial intervention can address.
Witnesses turning hostile are a setback for any case, but more importantly if trials are to stretch over years and even decades, it can affect the recollection and statements given by the witnesses. A quicker justice system and an effective witness protection programme are essential to ensure that such instances are checked.

2 comments:

  1. Good article Viju but the fact remains that in India, witnesses are not given any protection by law or otherwise in key cases from threats which are rampant on life, property, family, friends.. so in my opinion slamming witnesses gone rogue needs to be rechecked.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I couldn't agree more with you. We, as a nation, have not thought about witness protection as a serious component in ensuring that justice is delivered.

    ReplyDelete