Table of Contents
Bombay High Court Criticizes Magistrates for Pre-Determined Witness Statement Dates
While hearing a PIL on Suo Moto, the Bombay High Court on Thursday criticized Magistrates from Mumbai who grant fixed dates to each police station for recording the statements of witnesses and victims under Section 183 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
The Court stated that such statement must be taken immediately and without any delay and thereafter ordered Magistrates to withdraw the circulars containing such fixed dates.
A bench comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Prithviraj K Chavan was dealing with a plea for a fair probe in the sexual assault of a 3-yearold minor belonging to the scheduled caste category by her 15-year-old neighbour. The said criminal offence is reported to have occurred in Saki Naka Mumbai.
Perused and Heard in open court, Our respectful sister Judge Justice Revati Mohite Dere & Our esteemed brother P. K. Chavan J.
Civil Judge Revati Mohite Dere and Civil Judge Pk Chavan
The court today held that in the cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCCO), statements should be recorded as soon as the police station in question wants them and these statements should be recorded within a maximum of four days period.
“We deprecate this practice ignoring the urgency that will be there in a given case for recording of statements of victims under section 183 of BNSS. On a requisition made by the police station, it’s incumbent on the magistrate to ensure that the statement is recorded as expeditiously as possible within 3 to 4 days, and not later than 4 days,” the Court directed.
The direction was given after the public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar brought to the notice of the bench about the practice in Mumbai courts were magistrates fix two particular days in a month to record witness and victim statements from specific police stations.
In this case, it happened on 13 th August, and the police asked for a statement on 15 th August. However, due to the fact that the JFMC at Bandra had set the days for the recording of statement for the Saki Naka police station, the statement was not recorded till the time of the hearing.
Therefore, on order of the High Court, it was recorded by the next day as is revealed in the following statement.
Petitioner counsel Advocate Amit Katarnawre in his arguments during the hearing accused the police of negligence of duty as well as using abusive language on the complainant.
He also condemned the medias failure to report the crime, especially after the Ministry of Broadcasting gave alerts to report news with the vulnerable sections of society. He said that if the media had disclosed the case, the matter could have reached the Supreme Court on suo moto and as it was in the Badlapur case.
The Court observed that when it takes suo moto action is not taken in each and every case. It appreciated the efficiency of the police in registering FIR, arresting the accused the same day and also ensured that Medico legal of the victims were done on time
It stated that every matter is not taken suo moto The question is inaction of police From the timeline it seems there is prompt action It was not done by Badlapur police Look at timeline In this case action was taken immediately FIR was registered statement recorded observed the Court.
The Court also Perceived a little insensitiveness in dealing with the case, and pointed that any case involving prior antecedents has to be properly examined.
When the defence submitted that five police officers verbally abused the complainant, the Court posed reasons as to why further show cause notices under Section 4 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 be issued without laying down the same in writing.
Besides this, it directed that compensation to be given under the Manodhairya scheme which ranges from ₹3lac to 10 lac to survivors of sexual assault, rape, child sexual abuse, and acid attacks be given in a week.
