1981 (2) TMI 256 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. The role and conduct of a judge in a criminal trial.
2. The fairness of the trial process.
3. The admissibility and reliability of witness testimonies.
4. The use of the First Information Report (FIR) for corroboration.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. The Role and Conduct of a Judge in a Criminal Trial:

The judgment begins by questioning the true role of a judge in a criminal trial. It contrasts the passive role of a referee or umpire with the active role of an advocate, as discussed in Jones v. National Coal Board [1957] 2 All. E.R. 155. The court emphasizes that a judge should not merely be a spectator but must actively participate in the trial to ascertain the truth. The judge is empowered by Section 165 of the Evidence Act to put any questions to witnesses to discover the truth. However, the court cautions that while exercising these powers, the judge must not assume the role of a prosecutor or intimidate witnesses.

2. The Fairness of the Trial Process:

The judgment critically examines the conduct of the Sessions Judge in the trial. The judge's threats to witnesses about perjury and his stern attitude were deemed intimidating and inappropriate. The court notes that the judge's actions compromised the principle of a 'fair trial' and led to the rejection of the evidence provided by the key witnesses, P.Ws 8 and 9. The judgment highlights that the judge's role is to ensure justice by working harmoniously with the prosecution and defense, not by coercing witnesses.

3. The Admissibility and Reliability of Witness Testimonies:

The court scrutinizes the testimonies of P.Ws 8 and 9, noting inconsistencies and admissions of being pressured by the police. The Sessions Judge's threats and warnings to these witnesses were found to be intimidating, leading the court to reject their testimonies. The judgment underscores that witness testimonies must be free from coercion and intimidation to be reliable.

4. The Use of the First Information Report (FIR) for Corroboration:

The judgment addresses the argument that the evidence of P.Ws 8 and 9 could be corroborated by the FIR lodged by P.W. 2. The court clarifies that the FIR, being a previous statement, can only be used to corroborate or contradict its maker, not other witnesses. The court rejects the suggestion to use the FIR under Section 11 of the Evidence Act, as it would render other provisions dealing with witness statements redundant. The court concludes that the FIR cannot be used to corroborate the evidence of P.Ws 8 and 9 in this case.

Conclusion:

The court finds that the Sessions Judge's conduct compromised the fairness of the trial, leading to the rejection of key witness testimonies. The court also clarifies the limitations on using the FIR for corroboration. Consequently, the appeal is accepted, the conviction and sentence are set aside, and the appellant is directed to be released immediately.