The Supreme Court.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has taken a very serious view of "shocking" and "blatant" acts of Tamil Nadu police officers in tutoring prosecution witnesses.
The top court has directed the state police head to get an inquiry conducted and take action against erring police personnel.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan set free Manikandan and another person in a murder case of 2007, after drawing adverse inference against the prosecution for tutoring five witnesses.
"This is a blatant act by the police to tutor the material prosecution witnesses. All of them were interested witnesses. Their evidence will have to be discarded as there is a distinct possibility that the said witnesses were tutored by the police on the earlier day. This kind of interference by the police with the judicial process, to say the least, is shocking," the bench said in its judgment on April 5.
In the case, the court found first five interested witnesses, who were closely related to the deceased, were called to the police station and were "taught" by the police how to depose against the accused.
"Therefore, we must proceed on the footing that the first five witnesses were “taught” at the police station how to depose. This happened a day before the day their evidence was recorded before the court," the bench said.
The court said it was surprised how this critical aspects were overlooked by the high court as well as the trial court.
It noted precisely a day before the evidence of prosecution witnesses before the trial court, they were called to the police station and were taught to depose in a particular manner. One can reasonably imagine the effect of “teaching” the witnesses inside a police station, the court said.
"This amounts to gross misuse of power by the police machinery. The police cannot be allowed to tutor the prosecution witness. This conduct becomes more serious as other eyewitnesses, though available, were withheld," the bench said.
The appellants were accused of murdering Balamurugan on October 4, 2007. The deceased had asked prime accused Manikandan to deliver Idli at his home. On his failure, Balamurugan went to the house of the appellants where he was attacked with billhook on neck and finger, which resulted in his death.
The court, however, said there is a serious doubt created about the genuineness of the prosecution case.
"The benefit of this substantial doubt must be given to the appellants. Before the appellants were enlarged on bail by this Court, they had undergone incarceration for more than 10 years," the bench said, acquitting the two accused.