Court Cannot be a Silent Spectator to Delays: Madras High Court, Dismissing Petition to Recall Witnesses

The Madras High Court has dismissed a petition to recall three key witnesses in a criminal case pending for over 15 years, highlighting the necessity of adhering to efficient trial procedures. Justice Dr. G. Jayachandran, in his judgment dated April 12, 2024, emphasized the importance of preventing undue delays in the judicial process, aligning with directives from the Supreme Court to expedite longstanding cases.

The petitioners, Imrankan, Nowsathkan, and E. Razeethabegam, were involved in a case registered in 2009 (Crime No.260/2009) under the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Coimbatore. The petitioners sought to recall PW.1, PW.6, and PW.7 for cross-examination, arguing that their testimonies were crucial and that not recalling them would result in significant prejudice. The trial court had previously dismissed this request, leading to the current petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Justice Jayachandran observed that the trial had been excessively prolonged, with PW.1 examined back in June 2018 and PW.6 and PW.7 in November 2023. The court noted that the petitioners had ample opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses when they were initially presented but failed to do so without valid justification. "The petitioners' delay tactics under the guise of seeking a fair opportunity cannot be entertained," the court stated.

The court underscored the necessity of maintaining efficiency and preventing unnecessary adjournments that disrupt the judicial process. "When witnesses are present, the accused cannot seek adjournments indefinitely, causing harassment to the witnesses and delaying justice," the court remarked. This aligns with the Supreme Court's directive to expedite trials and avoid undue delays.

The court emphasized that the trial court's decision to dismiss the petition was in accordance with legal provisions and Supreme Court guidelines. "The trial court has rightly pointed out that the petitioners' request to recall witnesses at the fag end of the trial is an attempt to further delay proceedings," the judgment stated. The court reiterated that the judicial system must prioritize timely resolution of cases, particularly those pending for extended periods.

Justice Jayachandran remarked, "The trial court's order is absolutely in tune with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the provisions of law." He further noted, "The present application to recall the witnesses would only delay the process further and is not in the interest of justice."

The dismissal of the petition by the Madras High Court reinforces the judiciary's commitment to expediting long-pending cases and upholding the integrity of the judicial process. By affirming the lower court's decision, the judgment sends a clear message about the necessity of efficient trial proceedings and the judiciary's intolerance for unwarranted delays. This decision is expected to have significant implications for future cases, emphasizing the importance of timely justice.

Date of Decision: April 12, 2024

Imrankan Vs The Sub Inspector