When Witnesses Examined Virtually, Their Prior Statements Must Be Electronically Transmitted To Them : Supreme Court To Trial Courts

Delivering a significant judgment on Monday (November 17), the Supreme Court issued a binding directive to rectify a critical procedural gap in virtual trials. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta mandated that in all proceedings where a witness is examined via video conferencing, the trial court must facilitate the electronic transmission of the witness's prior statements to them.

This measure, the Court said addresses the "procedural irregularity" that disadvantaged the defence, which was often unable to effectively cross-examine a witness because the document containing their prior inconsistent statement could not be physically presented in the virtual setting.

Thus, recognizing the accused's right to fair cross-examination of a witness, the Court directed that “in every case where, it is proposed to record the statement of a witness over video conferencing and any previous written statement of such witness or a matter in writing is available and the party concerned is desirous of confronting the witness with such previous statement/matter in writing, the trial Court shall ensure that a copy of the statement/document is transmitted to the witness through electronic transmission mode and the procedure provided under Section 147 and Section 148 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (corresponding Section 144 and Section 145 of the Evidence Act) is followed in the letter and spirit, so as to safeguard the fairness and integrity of the trial.”

"This direction is being issued with a view to avoid procedural irregularities and to prevent disadvantage to any party before the Court, and also to uphold the principles of fair trial, effective cross-examination, and proper appreciation of evidence," the bench observed, while acquitting a man convicted for committing a murder.

In that case, the defence was unable to effectively cross-examine the sole eyewitness, who was testifying from abroad via video link, because the trial court could not show her the document containing her prior inconsistent statement. To address this procedural gap, the Court laid down the aforesaid directive to strengthen the integrity of trials in an increasingly digital world.

Also from the judgment - If Witness Had Opportunity To See Accused Before TIP, Test Identification Proceedings Not Reliable : Supreme Court

Cause Title: RAJ KUMAR @ BHEEMA VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1113

Click here to download judgment