Zahira Habibulla H Sheikh And Anr vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 12 April, 2004
The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed
in Zahira case [Zahira Habibulla H.
Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158 :
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.75 seconds)State Of U.P vs Shambhu Nath Singh And Ors on 29 March, 2001
Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for
short "the Code") is the only provision which confers
power on the trial court for granting adjournments in
criminal proceedings. The conditions laid down by the
legislature for granting such adjournments have been
clearly incorporated in the section. It reads thus:
Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 19 April, 2010
This Court in Manu Sharma v. State
(NCT of Delhi)6, and in Zahira
Habibullah Shaikh (5) v. State of
Gujarat 10 had highlighted the glaring
defects in the system like non-recording
of the statements correctly by the police
and the retraction of the statements by
the prosecution witness due to
intimidation, inducement and other
methods of manipulation. Courts,
however, cannot shut their eyes to the
reality. If a witness becomes hostile to
subvert the judicial process, the Courts
shall not stand as a mute spectator and
every effort should be made to bring
home the truth. Criminal judicial system
cannot be overturned by those gullible
witnesses who act under pressure,
inducement or intimidation. Further,
Section 193 of the IPC imposes
The State Of Gujarat vs Anirudhsing & Anr on 10 July, 1997
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also held
in State of Gujarat v. Anirudhsing [State of
Gujarat v. Anirudhsing, (1997) 6 SCC 514 : 1997
SCC (Cri) 946] that: "It is the salutary duty of
every witness who has the knowledge of the
commission of the crime, to assist the State in
giving evidence." Malimath Committee on Reforms
of Criminal Justice System, 2003 said in its report
that 'By giving evidence relating to the
commission of an offence, he performs a sacred
duty of assisting the court to discover the truth'.
Swaran Singh vs Swaran Singh And Others on 15 September, 2022
In Swaran Singh v. State of Punjab
(Swaran Singh, supra note 12 at 678),
Justice Wadhwa articulated his concern
regarding pathetic status of witnesses in
India as follows: "A witness in a criminal trial
may comefrom a far off place to find the case
adjourned. He has to come to the court many
times and at what cost to his own-self and
his family is not difficult to fathom. It has
become more or less a fashion to have a
criminal case adjourned again and again till
the witness tires and he gives up. It is the
game of unscrupulous lawyers to get the
adjournments for one excuse or the other till
a witness is threatened; he is abducted; he is
maimed, he is done away with; or even
bribed. There is no protection for him. In
adjourning the matter without any valid
cause a court unwittingly becomes party to
miscarriage of justice. A witness is then not
treated with respect in the court. He is
pushed out from the crowded courtroom by
the peon. He waits for the whole day and
then he finds that the matter is adjourned.
1