Trial Judges Shouldn't Be Like Tape Recorder While Recording Evidence, Must Ask Relevant Questions To Hostile Witnesses: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that the Presiding Officer sitting in the Trial Court while recording the evidence must not act like a spectator and tape recorder and must actively participate in the court proceedings. The court added that if any witness is declared hostile by the prosecution, the court itself must ask relevant questions to the witness, and if it finds sufficient grounds, it must proceed against such witness in accordance with law. A bench of Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava made these observations while allowing an appeal filed by a Rape accused seeking bail in the FIR lodged under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5, 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act. In brief, it was the case of the prosecution that rape was committed with the victim/informant by the present appellant and one unknown person on June 16, 2024. After the lodging of the FIR, the investigation started, which culminated in a charge sheet against the accused/appellant After the Trial Court rejected his bail, the appellant-accused moved the HC, wherein his counsel argued that the appellant was innocent and falsely implicated due to village animosity and that the prosecution's case was based on false facts. The single judge was also apprised that the prosecutrix, during her examination as PW-1, retracted her earlier statements which she made under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC earlier and denied the rape incident. The bench was also informed that the court declared the victim hostile and did not support the prosecution version at any point. Further, it was submitted that the appellant had no criminal history to his credit and had been in jail since June 20, 2024. On the other hand, the AGA opposed the prayer but however could not dispute this factual aspect of the matter that the victim of this case has not supported the prosecution version on any point during his examination before the Court and she has been declared hostile. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the fact that the victim of this case turned hostile and did not support the prosecution's case before the Court, the Court opined that the appellant had made out a case for bail. The court also noted that the Court below had erred in rejecting the appellant's bail application. Thus, the application was set aside, the appeal was allowed, and the accused was granted bail.Last year, the Supreme Court also observed that the trial judges should take a proactive role instead of acting as "mere tape recorders" recording witness statements. If there is any lapse by the prosecutor, then the judge should intervene and ask the witness the necessary questions to elicit relevant information."It is the duty of the court to arrive at the truth and subserve the ends of justice. The courts have to take a participatory role in the trial and not act as mere tape recorders to record whatever is being stated by the witnesses. The judge has to monitor the proceedings in aid of justice," observed the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwal and Manoj Misra. Case title - Sushil Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 48 Case Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 48 Click Here ToRead/Download order

Trial Judges Shouldn't Be Like Tape Recorder While Recording Evidence, Must Ask Relevant Questions To Hostile Witnesses: Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags