SUPREME COURT ALLOWS EXAMINATION OF WITNESS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

0
10823
sc

Referring to sec284 and 285 of CrPC allowed recording of statement of a witness residing in Nigeria through video conference.

APPELLANT: JUSTICE MANJO DEVI

RESPONDENT: STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR

CRIMINAL CASE NO: 688                            In this case a lady was found dead hanging from ceiling fan in her room. The lady ‘husband was suspected to be the murderer. The accused husband and mother of wife were fighting the case in the Court. The postmortem report was done by Dr.I.Yusuf in Aminu Kanu Teaching Hospital in Nigeria on January 26 2010.It was stated that case of death is “asphyxia secondary to strangulation”. The dead body was brought to India later to find the cause of death by Medical Board. The Medical Board of India has not given any definite cause of death in their report of post mortem. A suit was filed against husband for the offences covered under sec 302, 304B IPC and 484A of IPC.and here Dr.Yusuf was not regarded as a witness. In the trial court  held that the photography of post mortem from Nigeria is unnecessary and Medical board had not given any definite cause of death. The mother of deceased filed a application under CrPC sec 311 to summon Dr Yusuf which was rejected by trial court and over ruled by High Court. This impugned judgment was appealed to Supreme Court of India. In SC the counsel on behalf of mother of deceased argued by quoting case laws MINA LALITHA BARUWAI V STATE OF ORISA 2013 16 SCC and STATE OF MAHARASTRA V Dr PRAFUL . B .DESAI argued that it is very promient to consider  the witness of Dr Yusuf in order to find the cause of death and to have a proper scope. Counsel also objected for the delay of 8 years saying “a judicious approach to the case”. The Supreme Court concluded that witness Dr.I.Yusuf was germen to the case. Hence under sec CrPC 311 SC allowed the recording of Dr Yusuf in a video conference.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here