Smruti Tukaram Badade vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

11 January 2022

Case No.

Miscellaneous Application No. 1852 of 2019

Result

Disposed

Bench

D.Y. Chandrachud, Surya Kant

Citation

[2022] 1 S.C.R. 443 : 2022 INSC 39

Headnote

Guidelines/Norms/Directions: Guidelines – Issuance of – As regards recording evidence of vulnerable witnesses in criminal matters – Directions issued to facilitate the implementation of directions issued in State of Maharashtra v Bandu @ Daulat’s case for setting up ‘special centres for examination of vulnerable witnesses in criminal cases – Definition of “vulnerable witness” contained in Clause 3(a) of the ‘Guidelines for recording evidence of vulnerable witnesses in criminal matters’ of the High Court of Delhi widened – Along with child witnesses who have attained the age of 18 years, to include age and gender neutral victims of sexual assault, witnesses suffering from “mental illness”, any witness deemed to have a threat perception, any speech or hearing impaired individual or a person suffering from any other disability – Issuance of direction to the High Courts to adopt and notify a Vulnerable Witnesses Deposition Centres Scheme within the stipulated period – To devise and implement an all India VWDC training programme,a Committee to be constituted– Issuance of directions to all High Courts and concerned role assignees to facilitate conducting of training programmes, to set up an in-house permanent VWDC Committee and one permanent VWDC in every District Court or additional Sessions Court establishments – Furthermore, NALSA and SLSAs to provide an effective interface for the scheme for training – Constitution of India – Art. 142 – Criminal law – Witnesses.

Sakshi v Union of India (2004) 5 SCC 518 : [2004] (2) Suppl. SCR 723; State of Punjab v Gurmit Singh (1996)

2 SCC 384 : [1996] (1) SCR 532; State of Maharashtra v Bandu @ Daulat (2018) 11 SCC 163; Mahender

Chawla v Union of India (2019) 14 SCC 615 : [2018]

(14) SCR 627 – relied on.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. The need for and importance of setting up facilities which cater to the need for creating a safe and barrier free environment for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses has engaged the attention of this Court over two decades. In Sakshi v Union of India1, this Court issued directions in addition to those which were contained in the decision in State of Punjab v Gurmit Singh2. The relevant extract from the decision in Sakshi (supra) reads thus: “34. […] (1) The provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 327

View Subscription Plans →