Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Supreme Court Cancels Bail Amid Witness Tampering Allegations: Ensuring a Fair Trial Is Paramount.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has canceled the bail granted to Respondent No. 1 in a high-profile case involving allegations of intimidation and witness tampering. The decision, handed down by a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta, comes in response to the changing testimonies of crucial witnesses and disturbing post-bail developments.

The bench emphasized the importance of maintaining a fair trial and ensuring the safety and credibility of witnesses. Justice Surya Kant stated, “The Courts are under an onerous duty to ensure that the criminal justice system is vibrant and effective; perpetrators of the crime do not go unpunished; the witnesses are not under any threat or influence to prevent them from deposing truthfully.”

The judgment cited Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows for the recalling of witnesses, and invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to withdraw the bail granted to Respondent No. 1. Justice Dipankar Datta explained, “A major challenge before this Court is to ensure a fair trial amidst the hostility of witnesses. Witnesses play a very vital role in bringing justice home.”

The court ordered Respondent No. 1 to surrender within one week and remain in custody until the conclusion of the trial. It also directed the Trial Court to recall key witnesses for further cross-examination. Additionally, the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru, was tasked with providing security to the appellant and her family and investigating alleged threats or inducements against witnesses.

This decision underscores the court’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice and the integrity of the criminal justice system. It sends a clear message that attempts to intimidate or influence witnesses will not be tolerated.

Date of Decision: October 20, 2023

Munilakshmi   vs Narendra Babu & Anr.                                             

Similar News