Scribd
Upload
135 views3 pages

Manju Devi Vs The State of Rajasthan

The Supreme Court of India ruled that a witness residing in Nigeria could have their testimony recorded through video conferencing in a criminal trial in India. The trial involved charges of dowry death and cruelty against the husband of a woman who died under unnatural circumstances in Nigeria. While the initial autopsy in Nigeria found strangulation as the cause of death, the medical board in India could not determine a definite cause of death. The court ruled that recording the testimony of the Nigerian doctor who conducted the initial autopsy through video conferencing would avoid inconvenience to the witness and parties involved, while helping the trial court reach a just decision. The trial court was directed to take necessary steps to record the witness's statement via video conferencing and conclude

Uploaded by

Sampurna Basnet
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
135 views3 pages

Manju Devi Vs The State of Rajasthan

The Supreme Court of India ruled that a witness residing in Nigeria could have their testimony recorded through video conferencing in a criminal trial in India. The trial involved charges of dowry death and cruelty against the husband of a woman who died under unnatural circumstances in Nigeria. While the initial autopsy in Nigeria found strangulation as the cause of death, the medical board in India could not determine a definite cause of death. The court ruled that recording the testimony of the Nigerian doctor who conducted the initial autopsy through video conferencing would avoid inconvenience to the witness and parties involved, while helping the trial court reach a just decision. The trial court was directed to take necessary steps to record the witness's statement via video conferencing and conclude

Uploaded by

Sampurna Basnet
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Name of Case: Manju Devi vs The State of Rajasthan on 16 April,

2019
Court: Supreme Court of India
Jurisdiction: Criminal Appellate

Issue: Whether Examination of Witness can be done through video –


conference?

Accusation: Facing trial for offences under Sections 302, 304-Band 498-
A of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’) due to the death of his wife under
unnatural circumstances in Nigeria.

Fact: The deceased daughter of the appellant was married to the


accused-respondent No. 2 on 21.04.2008 at Rajaldesar; she was residing
in her matrimonial home along with father and mother of her husband;
and later on, she had shifted to Bangalore and then to Nigeria with her
husband but was regularly harassed with demand for dowry. It is alleged
that on 14.01.2010, the appellant's daughter, while living with her
husband (the accused-respondent No. 2) in Nigeria, died under
unnatural circumstances when she was found hanging from the ceiling
fan in her room. A FIR bearing No. 10 of 2010 was lodged at Police
Station Rajaldesar, District Churu by the husband of appellant (father of
the deceased), alleging, inter alia, that his daughter was harassed with
persistent demands for dowry and she was subjected to cruelty to the
extent that it ultimately led to her death in Nigeria.

Relevant Laws: Section 284,285, 311 and 482 Code of Criminal


Procedure

Cause of Death:

The first post-mortem of the dead-body of the appellant's daughter was


conducted by Dr. I.Yusuf in Aminu Kanu Teaching Hospital, Nigeria on
16.01.2010 who, upon examination, stated his opinion that the cause of
death was "asphyxia secondary to strangulation".

Thereafter, the dead-body of the appellant's daughter was brought to


India where a Medical Board was constituted for further post-mortem but
the Medical Board stated that no definite opinion could be formed
regarding the time and cause of death of the daughter of the appellant.
After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the respondent No. 2
for the offences under Sections 302, 304-B and 498-A IPC.

But during trial, the medicial Board could not state definite opinion of
death therefore they consulted Dr. I. Yusuf, Department of Pathology,
Aminu Kanu Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, who had first conducted the
post-mortem of the dead-body of the appellant's daughter in Nigeria, so
that he may be examined as a medical witness. It was also submitted in
the alternative that the evidence of the said doctor may be recorded
through video-conferencing. Though photocopy of the post-mortem
report prepared in Nigeria was also presented. The appellant filed a
criminal miscellaneous petition before the High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan at Jodhpur but the petition was dismissed as the court said
that it was the discretion exercised by the Trial Court and it called for no
interference.

Section 311 CrPC

"311. Power to summon material witness, or examine person present:


Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding
under this Code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any
person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and
re-examine any person already examined; and the Court shall summon
and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence
appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case"

Importance of Section 311


Section 311 CrPC empowers the court to summon a material witness, or
to examine a person present at “any stage” of “any enquiry”, or “trial”, or
“any other proceedings” under CrPC, or to summon any person as a
witness, or to recall and re-examine any person who has already been
examined if his evidence appears to it, to be essential to the arrival of a
just decision of the case.

Decision:

In the present case too, where the witness Dr. I.Yusuf is residing in
Nigeria, in order to avoid inconvenience to the witness as also to the
parties, issuing of commission and recording his evidence through video-
conferencing appears to be a viable alternative; and the Trial Court need
to take all the requisite steps so as to ensure that his evidence comes on
record with least inconvenience and/or burden to the parties and the
witness.

The Trial Court shall now take all the necessary measures for
ensuring the examination of the witness concerned by issuing
commission and/or recording his statement through video-
conferencing and shall also ensure expeditious proceedings so as
to conclude the matter at the earliest.

Source : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/99927826/

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy