The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of creating a safe and barrier-free environment for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses and issuing directions for the adoption and notification of Vulnerable Witnesses Deposition Centres.

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J.

1. The need for and importance of setting up facilities which cater to the need for creating a safe and barrier free environment for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses has engaged the attention of this Court over two decades. In Sakshi v Union of India, (2004) 5 SCC 518 this Court issued directions in addition to those which were contained in the decision in State of Punjab v Gurmit Singh, (1996) 2 SCC 384. The relevant extract from the decision in Sakshi (supra) reads thus:

“34. […]

(1) The provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 327 CrPC shall, in addition to the offences mentioned in the sub-section, also apply in inquiry or trial of offences under Sections 354 and 377 IPC.

(2) In holding trial of child sex abuse or rape:

(i) a screen or some such arrangements may be made where the victim or witnesses (who may be equally vulnerable like the victim) do not see the body or face of the accused;

(ii) the questions put in cross-examination on behalf of the accused, insofar as they relate directly to the incident, should be given in writing to the presiding officer of the court who may put them to the victim or witnesses in a language which is clear and is not embarrassing;

(iii) the victim of child abuse or rape, while giving testimony in court, should be allowed sufficient breaks as and when required.”

2. More recently, in State of Maharashtra v Bandu @ Daulat, (2018) 11 SCC 163, directions were issued by this Court for setting up “special centres for examination of vulnerable witnesses” in criminal cases so as to facilitate a conducive environment for recording the statements of vulnerable witnesses. This Court dwelt on the guidelines which have been issued by the High Court of Delhi for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses in criminal matters and noted that special centres have been set up in Delhi for that purpose. While observing that the direction of the High Court of Delhi for setting up special centres for vulnerable witnesses is consistent with the earlier decisions of this Court and supplement the principles which have been laid down, this Court issued the following directions:

“12. […] all High Courts can adopt such guidelines if the same have not yet been adopted with such modifications as may be deemed necessary. Setting up of one centre for vulnerable witnesses may be perhaps required almost in every district in the country. All the High Courts may take appropriate steps in this direction in due course in phases. At least two such centres in the jurisdiction of each High Court may be set up within three months from today. Thereafter, more such centres may be set up as per decision of the High Courts.”

3. The fairness of the process of trial as well as the pursuit of substantive justice are determined in a significant measure by the manner in which statements of vulnerable witnesses are recorded. The dignity of person, which is an intrinsic element of Article 21 of the Constitution, cannot be left to the vagaries of insensitive procedures and a hostile environment. Access to justice mandates that positive steps have to be adopted to create a barrier free environment. These barriers are not only those which exist within the physical spaces of conventional courts but those which operate on the minds and personality of vulnerable witnesses. There is a pressing need to facilitate the salutary purpose underlying the creation of a barrier free environment where depositions can be recorded freely without constraining limitations, both physical and emotional. This requires not just the creation of infrastructure but sensitizing all stakeholders.

4. This Court issued notice to all the High Courts in pursuance of which they have appeared through Counsel. Based on the material which has been placed before the Court, Ms Vibha Datta Makhija, amicus curiae, has prepared a tabulated statement of the position of infrastructure in various High Courts as of 25 October 2021. A copy