The court emphasized the necessity of recording specific satisfaction regarding the danger to witnesses before granting protection measures under UAPA and NIA Act, ensuring individual assessments rather than blanket orders.

JUDGMENT :

(Abhay S. Oka, J.)

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the first respondent. The appellant is accused No. 1. The appellant is being tried by the Special Court for the National Investigation Agency (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NIA') cases in Chennai. Initially, an offence was registered under Sections 341 , 294(b) and 307 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). Subsequently, Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302 read with 149 of the IPC and Section 15 read with Sections 16 , 18, 18B, 19 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short, ‘the UAPA ’) were added. Upon completion of investigation/filing of charge-sheet, an application was made by the Special Public Prosecutor of the NIA, invoking powers of the Special Court under Section 44 of the UAPA , read with Section 17 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short, ‘NIA Act’) read with Section 17 3(6) of Cr.P.C., for the protection of witnesses. The provisions of Section 44 of the UAPA , as well as Section 17 of the NIA Act, are pari materia. In this case, we are concerned with sub-section 2 of Section 44 of the UAPA . Section 44 of the UAPA reads thus:

“4. Protection of witnesses.—

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, the proceedings under this Act may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, be held in camera if the court so desires.

(2) A court, if on an application made by a witness in any proceeding before it or by the Public Prosecutor in relation to such witness or on its own motion, is satisfied that the life of such witness is in danger, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, take such measures as it deems fit for keeping the identity and address of such witness secret.

(3) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (2), the measures which a court may take under that sub-section may include—

(a) the holding of the proceedings at a place to be decided by the court;

(b) the avoiding of the mention of the name and address of the witness in its orders or judgments or in any records of the case accessible to public;

(c) the issuing of any directions for securing that the identity and address of the witness are not disclosed;

(d) a decision that it is in the public interest to order that all or any of the proceedings pending before such a court shall not be published in any manner.

(4) Any person who contravenes any decision or direction issued under sub-section (3), shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

3. Sub-section 2 of Section 17 of the NIA Act is identical. The prayer made by the Special Public Prosecutor in the application reads thus:

“(1) to issue necessary order or orders for not supplying of copies of the statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. in respect of Protected Witnesses to the accused persons or their advocate/legal counsel under the provisions of section 17 of the NIA Act, 2008 and section 44 of the UA(P) Act, 1967 r/w 173(6) Cr.P.C., in view of safety and security of the witnesses, until such time this Hon’ble Court deems fit; and to