Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 42 (0.26 seconds)

The State Of Maharashtra vs Dr. Praful B. Desai on 1 April, 2003

"31. The whole inquiry before a court being to elicit the truth, it is absolutely necessary that the victim or the witnesses are able to depose about the entire incident in a free atmosphere without any embarrassment. Section 273 CrPC merely requires the evidence to be taken in the presence of the accused. The section, however, does not say that the evidence should be recorded in such a manner that the accused should have full view of the victim or the witnesses. Recording of evidence by way of video-conferencing vis-à-vis Section 273 CrPC has been held to be permissible in a recent decision of this Court in State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai [(2003) 4 SCC 601 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 815] . There is major difference between substantive provisions defining crimes and providing punishment for the same and procedural enactment laying down the procedure of trial of such offences. Rules of procedure are handmaiden of justice and are meant to advance and not to obstruct the cause of justice. It is, therefore, permissible for the court to expand or enlarge the meanings of such provisions in order to elicit the truth and do justice with the parties.
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 166 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next