Delhi lawyers call off strike after police commissioner modifies notification
The lawyers had called for a strike after being unsatisfied with the Delhi police commissioner’s circular, allowing formal witnesses to appear before court through videoconference
NEW DELHI: The Delhi district court lawyers on Monday called off their strike after the city’s police commissioner issued a circular saying that police officers shall physically appear before trial courts for recording their evidence in a criminal trial.
The bar leaders had called for a strike from today after being unsatisfied with the Delhi police commissioner’s earlier circular, which allowed formal witnesses to appear before the court through the videoconference (VC) facility.
Commissioner Satish Golcha, through the latest circular, said that as modification to an earlier order, “it is hereby directed that in all criminal trials, all police officers/personnel shall physically appear before the Hon’ble Courts for the purpose of deposition/evidence”. The circular stated that meanwhile, material witnesses shall appear before the court in person to record their evidence.
A formal witness in a trial is the officer who wrote or signed off the first information report (FIR) based on the complainant’s statements, the officer who accompanied the investigating officer (IO) or the malkhana-in-charge. A material witness is the IO, who investigates the case and prepares the chargesheet, or the officer who recovers the weapons from the scene of crime and prepares the seizure copy.
Additional secretary general of the Coordination Committee of All Delhi District Courts, Advocate Tarun Rana said, “Our demands have been met and we have now called off the strike…our long-term demand will be to get the contentious sections of BNSS amended but for now we are satisfied with the decision of the authorities”.
{{/usCountry}}Additional secretary general of the Coordination Committee of All Delhi District Courts, Advocate Tarun Rana said, “Our demands have been met and we have now called off the strike…our long-term demand will be to get the contentious sections of BNSS amended but for now we are satisfied with the decision of the authorities”.
{{/usCountry}}The bar leaders have been demanding an amendment to four contentious sections of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). These include Section 530 of BNSS, which states that all trial and proceedings, including examination of a complainant and witnesses, recording of their evidence, may be held in electronic mode to expedite the case. They have also questioned Section 308, which provides that evidence must be recorded in the presence of the accused, including through audio-video electronic means at designated places notified by the state government. Two other sections that lawyers claimed have the possibility of tilting the trial towards the prosecution’s favour are sections 265 and 266, which allow for evidence of prosecution and defence witnesses to be recorded through audio-video electronic means at designated places notified by the state government.
{{/usCountry}}The bar leaders have been demanding an amendment to four contentious sections of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). These include Section 530 of BNSS, which states that all trial and proceedings, including examination of a complainant and witnesses, recording of their evidence, may be held in electronic mode to expedite the case. They have also questioned Section 308, which provides that evidence must be recorded in the presence of the accused, including through audio-video electronic means at designated places notified by the state government. Two other sections that lawyers claimed have the possibility of tilting the trial towards the prosecution’s favour are sections 265 and 266, which allow for evidence of prosecution and defence witnesses to be recorded through audio-video electronic means at designated places notified by the state government.
{{/usCountry}}The lawyers claimed that while regular appearances and bail arguments should be held through VC, evidence should not be recorded by any of the witnesses, be it police or otherwise, from any place other than the court.
Last month, the Coordination Committee had gone on strike for six days against lieutenant governor VK Saxena’s August 13 notification allowing police personnel to give evidence to courts from police stations via video conferencing.
Lawyers contended that the notification disrupted the fair process of trials and gave police an advantage of manipulating evidence in their favour by deposing through police stations, instead of appearing in person before the court.
Following chakka jams (road blockade) across six district courts of Delhi and proceedings adjourned for almost a week, the strike was called off after an assurance from the Union home ministry on elaborate discussions with all stakeholders and an order issued by the Delhi Police, temporarily staying the operation of the notification. Bar leaders also met Union home minister Amit Shah regarding the same.
However, the police commissioner in a circular dated September 4 said that as per a Delhi high court notification on August 4, designated places for recording evidence include prisons, forensic departments, prosecution offices, and police stations, prompting the lawyers to declare an indefinite strike from today.
The chairman of Bar Council of India, senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, had on Saturday written to the bar leaders of district courts to call off the strike and hold a meeting, in view of the problems faced by litigants and their counsels in getting their cases heard.
