Delhi High Court to hear PIL challenging LG Delhi’s notification allowing police witnesses to testify from their own stations, as lawyers continue strike citing concerns over fair trial and judicial integrity.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Delhi High Court against a controversial August 13 notification issued by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. The notification declared all police stations in the national capital as “designated places” for police officers to depose via video conferencing.
The PIL, filed by Advocate Kapil Madan in Kapil Madan v. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors, contends that the notification undermines the right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, as it allows prosecution witnesses, primarily police officials, to testify from their own official precincts.
Grounds of the Challenge
The petitioners argue that the notification violates several constitutional and procedural principles:
- Violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality): The notification creates an arbitrary and unreasonable classification by giving police witnesses the convenience of testifying from their offices while other witnesses are required to appear in court.
- Undermining the Judiciary and Separation of Powers: By designating police stations as deposition centers, the Executive allegedly usurped judicial powers, contrary to Article 50 of the Constitution, which mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive.
- Risk of Witness Tampering: Lawyers argue that allowing officers to testify from police stations increases the risk of coaching or undue influence by senior officers, threatening the integrity of evidence.
- Contravention of Criminal Procedure & Delhi HC Rules: The notification is claimed to be contrary to the Delhi High Court Video Conferencing Rules, 2020, which govern how virtual depositions should be conducted.
- Compromise of Evidence Handling: Physical evidence, like seized items or weapons, cannot be effectively presented in remote depositions, potentially undermining the fairness of trials.
Lawyers Speak Out Against Notification
The legal community in Delhi has responded strongly to this move:
- Lawyers’ Strike: Since August 22, lawyers in Delhi’s district courts have been on strike to protest the notification. The All District Bar Associations of Delhi have warned that strict action will be taken against any advocate appearing in court during the strike, whether physically or virtually.
- Representation to LG & Central Government: The Coordination Committee requested withdrawal of the notification on August 20, citing procedural and fairness concerns.
- Support from Bar Bodies: The Bar Council of India (BCI) expressed concerns that the notification undermines the fairness of trials and cross-examinations. Similarly, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) termed the move unlawful, arbitrary, and against principles of natural justice.
The Legal Question
The matter is whether the Executive can unilaterally designate police stations as deposition centers, potentially infringing on the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial, judicial independence, and procedural safeguards.
Advocates argue that such a move compromises the integrity of the judicial process by allowing witnesses to depose from a setting that may not ensure neutrality or the authenticity of evidence.
Case Title:
Kapil Madan v. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors
Click Here to Read More Reports on Rahul Gandhi Case