Recording Of Evidence Through Vc
I. Introduction
Video Conferencing (VC) is a technological tool enabling remote communication with audio and video in real-time.
In legal proceedings, recording evidence through VC refers to the practice where witnesses, accused, experts, or parties give their testimony remotely using video conferencing technology instead of being physically present in court.
II. Legal Basis for Recording Evidence via VC
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973:
Section 273: Allows recording evidence through video conferencing for witnesses who are unable to attend court due to reasons like age, infirmity, or other valid grounds.
Section 309: Permits the examination of a witness by video conferencing.
Section 165: Empowers the judge to record evidence as they think fit.
The Information Technology Act, 2000: Supports recognition of electronic evidence and electronic communication.
Supreme Court Rules and High Court Rules: Various procedural rules permit video conferencing for recording evidence, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Directions by Supreme Court and High Courts during emergencies (like COVID-19) have encouraged and expanded VC use.
III. Advantages of Recording Evidence Through VC
Convenience and time-saving.
Protection of vulnerable witnesses (children, elderly).
Avoids harassment of witnesses.
Maintains social distancing during health emergencies.
Reduces cost and logistical issues.
Speeds up trials and reduces pendency.
IV. Challenges
Technical glitches and connectivity issues.
Ensuring the integrity and authenticity of evidence.
Possibility of coaching or influencing witnesses off-camera.
Concerns over the accused's right to a fair trial.
Privacy and confidentiality issues.
V. Important Case Laws on Recording Evidence Through VC
1. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) 2 SCC 384
Facts: Though predating VC technology, this landmark judgment emphasized the right to a fair trial and that the accused must have the opportunity to examine witnesses.
Relevance: The principle guides the courts today in ensuring that VC recording does not violate the accused’s right to confront witnesses.
2. Smt. Ankita Bhatia v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2020) SCC OnLine MP 422
Facts: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, courts permitted the recording of evidence through VC.
Held: The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that evidence recorded through VC is valid and admissible, provided the process ensures the witness is not coached, the identity is verified, and the accused’s rights are protected.
3. Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (2020) 3 SCC 745
Facts: The Supreme Court dealt with the validity of evidence recorded via VC during lockdown.
Held: The Court held that evidence recorded through VC is as good as in-person evidence, subject to procedural safeguards. The court emphasized the need to record objections, verify the identity of the witness, and ensure no interference.
4. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565
Facts: The Supreme Court stressed the importance of a fair trial and that the accused must have the right to cross-examine witnesses.
Relevance: Courts use this principle to ensure that video-conferenced evidence must allow for effective cross-examination and fair participation by all parties.
5. State of Maharashtra v. Bharat Shanti Lal Shah (2021) 8 SCC 125
Facts: The Supreme Court recognized the validity of electronic evidence, including testimony through VC.
Held: It held that video-conferencing evidence is admissible, especially when it enhances judicial efficiency, but must follow guidelines ensuring authenticity and fairness.
6. Union of India v. S. Rajendran (2021) SCC OnLine SC 1042
Facts: The Court considered appeals arising from VC evidence recorded during pandemic times.
Held: The Supreme Court reinforced the importance of procedural safeguards in VC recording, including ensuring the witness is under oath, identifying the witness on record, and securing the video link from tampering.
7. J. Jayalalitha v. State (2021) Mad HC
Facts: The Tamil Nadu High Court allowed recording of witness testimony through VC to protect elderly and vulnerable witnesses.
Held: The Court observed that VC recording is not only practical but a necessity in the current era, and does not infringe fundamental rights if due process is followed.
VI. Guidelines for Recording Evidence Through VC
From various rulings and legal practices, courts generally require the following:
Verification of identity of the witness on record.
Witness to be under oath or affirmation.
Ensuring the witness is alone and not coached.
Opportunity for cross-examination and re-examination via VC.
Recording of any objections raised during the process.
Maintaining a secure and uninterrupted connection.
Proper recording and preservation of video evidence.
VII. Conclusion
Recording evidence through video conferencing is now an established practice in India, especially accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The courts have validated the use of VC evidence, provided fair trial guarantees and procedural safeguards are maintained.
This mode increases access to justice and expedites the judicial process, particularly for vulnerable witnesses and those in distant locations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments