If There Are Lapses By Prosecutors, Trial Judges Should Play Active Role In Evidence Process : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court said that trial judges should take a proactive role instead of acting as "mere tape recorders" recording witness statements. If there is any lapse by the prosecutor, then the judge should intervene and ask necessary questions to the witness to elicit relevant information.

"It is the duty of the court to arrive at the truth and subserve the ends of justice. The courts have to take a participatory role in the trial and not act as mere tape recorders to record whatever is being stated by the witnesses. The judge has to monitor the proceedings in aid of justice," observed the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwal and Manoj Misra.

The bench made these comments while deciding a criminal appeal in a murder case. The bench made these comments while deciding a criminal appeal in a murder case. The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife in his home. The only eyewitness was their 5-year-old daughter, who turned hostile.

The Court noted that after the witness was declared hostile, all that the public prosecutor did was to put few suggestions to her for the purposes of cross-examination. Even proper contradictions were not brought on record.

"The trial judge also failed to play an active role in the present case," the Court said. In this context, the bench made the remarks regarding the role of trial judge.

"The judge has to monitor the proceedings in aid of justice. Even if the prosecutor is remiss or lethargic in some ways, the court should control the proceedings effectively so that the ultimate objective that is the truth is arrived at. The court must be conscious of serious pitfalls and dereliction of duty on the part of the prosecuting agency. Upon failure of the prosecuting agency showing indifference or adopting an attitude of aloofness, the trial judge must exercise the vast powers conferred under Section 165 of the Evidence Act and Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. respectively to elicit all the necessary materials by playing an active role in the evidence collecting process," the judgment stated.

"The judge is expected to actively participate in the trial, elicit necessary materials from the witnesses in the appropriate context which he feels necessary for reaching the correct conclusion. The judge has uninhibited power to put questions to the witness either during the chief examination or cross-examination or even during re-examination for this purpose. If a judge feels that a witness has committed an error or slip, it is the duty of the judge to ascertain whether it was so, for, to err is human and the chances of erring may accelerate under stress of nervousness during cross-examination."

Related - 'Trial Judge Shouldn't Be A Mute Spectator; Has Duty To Ask Crucial Questions' : Supreme Court While Setting Aside Conviction In Murder Case

Judge Is Not A Mere Recording Machine; Must Actively Search For Truth In Trial : Supreme Court Sends Back Death Penalty Matter To HC

Also from the judgment

 Principles Of Applying Section 106 Of Evidence Act : Supreme Court Explains

Prosecutors Must Effectively Cross-Examine Hostile Witnesses To Show They're Lying; Merely Marking Contradictions Not Sufficient: Supreme Court