Examination of defence witness-Duty of court to give reasons

CBI v. Tuncay Alankus, (2013) 9 SCC 611
Criminal Law

Ss. 243(2), 397 and 401 - Defence witnesses - Discretionary jurisdiction of court under S. 243(2) to refuse to summon
any witness - Proper exercise of - Interference therewith in revision - When warranted and proper mode of - Reason for
refusal to be recorded in writing - When reasons are so recorded by trial court, High Court in exercise of revisional
jurisdiction under S. 397 r/w S. 401, while taking a different view, must assign its own reasons in support of its view and
how reasons assigned by trial court are not tenable - Respondent a Turkish citizen had been charged under S. 120-B
r/w Ss. 409, 420 IPC and S. 13(2) r/w Ss. 7, 11 and 13(1)(c) & (d), PC Act, 1988, and had been extradited to India -
Many defence witnesses belonged to or were situate in different countries - Held, if the summons are sought to be
obtained to examine the said witnesses, ordinarily, the defence is required to satisfy the court as to how examination of
the said witnesses would be in aid of its defence - Witnesses need not be summoned only because the defence wishes
the court to do so
- As High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction has not adverted to this aspect of the matter, the
impugned judgment taking a contrary view cannot be sustained - Matter remanded to High Court for disposal afresh -
Interim order dt. 4-9-2006 is made absolute to the effect that respondent is restrained from withdrawing the amount from
his Swiss Bank account till the decision of the matter, 
Criminal Law

Ss. 243 and 242 - Examination of witnesses by videoconferencing - Trial court's direction regarding - Necessary
directions should also be given by court as to who would bear requisite expenses, 

Print Page