2023 Supreme(SC) 1077

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SURYA KANT, DIPANKAR DATTA, JJ.
Munilakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Narendra Babu and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 3297 of 2023, Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 3312 of 2021
Decided On : 20-10-2023

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Bail – If a witness turns hostile for extenuating reasons and is reluctant to depose unvarnished truth, it will cause irreversible damage to administration of justice and faith of society at large in efficacy and credibility of criminal justice system will stand eroded and shattered.
(2) Recall of witness – Power to recall witnesses under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. ought to be exercised sparingly – Mere hostility by a witness, per se, would not be a sufficient ground to infer misuse of concession of bail.

Headnote:

(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439(2) – Bail – Grant of – Challenge as to – Charge of murder of wife – Respondent No. 1 has potential to influence investigation or witnesses who were slated to depose against him – Seriousness of allegations levelled against Respondent No. 1 by deceased during her lifetime or by Appellant before Police or in this appeal ought to be evaluated against this backdrop – This Court has narrow scope of interference in order granting bail while exercising its power of judicial review and will be invariably reluctant to interfere in such order even if it has a different opinion – However, if it is found that an undertrial has attempted to misuse concession of bail either by influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence or trying to flee from justice, such person can be committed to custody by withdrawing concession of bail – Courts are under onerous duty to ensure that criminal justice system is vibrant and effective; perpetrators of crime do not go unpunished; witnesses are not under any threat or influence to prevent them from deposing truthfully and victims of crime get their voices heard at every stage of proceedings. (Paras 19, 20, 21 and 22)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439(2) – Bail – Grant of – Challenge as to – Charge of murder of wife – Witnesses play a very vital role in bringing justice home – If a witness turns hostile for extenuating reasons and is reluctant to depose unvarnished truth, it will cause irreversible damage to administration of justice and faith of society at large in efficacy and credibility of criminal justice system will stand eroded and shattered – There is prima facie proximity between grant of bail to Respondent No. 1 and an emboldening opportunity for him to win over witnesses – Respondent No. 1 does not deserve to enjoy concession of bail at least until all crucial witnesses are examined – Privilege of liberty extended to him deserves to be withdrawn for effective, fair, just and unbiased conclusion of trial – Impugned order set aside and bail granted to Respondent No. 1 cancelled. (Paras 25, 26 and 32)

(C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 311 – Constitution Of India – Article 142 – Recall of witness – A person can be called and examined though not summoned as a witness, or can be recalled, or re-examined so as to throw light upon imputations – Section 311 of Cr.P.C. does not intend to fill lacunae in prosecution’s case and cause any serious prejudice to rights of accused – Exercise of power under this provision is intended to meet ends of justice and to gather overwhelming evidence to scoop out truth – Power to recall witnesses under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. ought to be exercised sparingly – Mere hostility by a witness, per se, would not be a sufficient ground to infer misuse of concession of bail. (Paras 28 and 31)

Facts of the case:

Present criminal appeal arises out of an order dated 12.08.2020 passed by High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, whereby Respondent No. 1 was granted regular bail in trial proceedings numbered S.C. No. 1111/2021, pending before Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. Said trial has emanated from Crime No. 151/2019 dated 21.12.2019 registered at Police Station Vyalikaval, Bengaluru under Sections 109, 120B, 201, 302, 450, 454 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

Findings of Court:

It a case fit for recalling witnesses (PW-1, PW-4 and PW-5) for their further cross-examination to reach an effective decision in subject trial.

Result : Appeal allowed with directions.