IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

PETITIONER: MAHENDER CHAWLA
V.
RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA
ON 5th DECEMBER 2018
BY JUSTICE S A NAZEER AND JUSTICE A SIKRI

Witness is a name given to a person who possess

information or documents about any crime considered as material for
criminal proceeding and who has made a statement.

 Mahender Chawla v. Union of India (2018 SCC Online SC 2678) is

a landmark judgement given by justice S A Nazeer and justice A Sikri
regarding the witness protection scheme.
The petitioners filed the writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India raised important issues on the efficacy of the
criminal justice system of this country. They approached this court
with allegations that in trials that were going on against Asaram, who
was charged with the offense of committing rapes, witnesses had been
frightened with serious consequences if they deposed against Asaram.
It was alleged that as many of the witnesses had already been attacked
and three witnesses had been killed. Petitioners had demanded for a
Court-monitored SIT or a CBI probe.

The petitioners raised the issue that pertains to the protection and
security of witnesses during the proceedings.

The petitioners argued that 3 witnesses has already killed and 10 had
been already attacked. Mahender Chawla, the first petitioner had
miraculously survived the attack in his life to give witness against
Asaram Bapu, the alleged God and his son Narayan Sai in the case of
1
rape of a child and two sisters. He also witnessed Narayan Sai doing
some Tantric practice in the child’s body in an Asaram in Madhya
Pradesh, in which still date there is no investigation due to the
influence of Asaram
Petitioner no. 3 Karamvir Singh is the father of the raped child. The
Utter Pradesh police withdrew half of the petitioners’ security despite
being threatened by them. Narendra Yadav petitioner no. 4 who was
attacked because he wrote articles against Asaram Bapu and Narayan
Sai.

Attorney general Mr Venugopal appeared on behalf of the defendants

along with Ms. Pinky Anand, the addl. Attorney general.

The supreme court has given a great verdict which gave effect to the
witness protection scheme, 2018 which aims to promote law
enforcement by the protection of persons who are directly or
indirectly involved in providing assistance to criminal law agencies
and the overall administration of the justice. Later on the ministry of
home affairs prepared a draft witness protection scheme and the union
government finalised after gathering things from the state, union
territories, high courts, police and the National Legal Services
Authority(NALSA).

The Supreme Court in State of Gujrat v. Anirudh Singh (1997) held

that it is the duty of the witness to assist the state in giving evidence
who has the knowledge of the commission of the crime. The witness
protection scheme was introduced with the aim of ensuring that the
witness should not be frightened to provide evidence so that the trials
were not prejudiced.

The scope of the witness protection scheme is varying according to

the degree of vulnerability of the witness. Under this scheme the
witness protection measures is time bound and cannot exceed three
months. The scheme also urges every state to publicise the provision
so that the people fearlessly start coming forward. It is a very
comprehensive scheme which is bound to change the dynamics of
law. It is the first attempt at the national level to bring the perpetrators
2
of crime to justice. The scheme ensures that the witness will
contribute in the strengthening of the criminal justice system and will
improve the national; security. The main reasons for establishing the
scheme was that a large percentage of the witness in most of the cases
were turning hostile and giving false testimonies especially in the case
of women and children.

The scheme in its second part mentions the steps to be taken to protect
a witness.it provides that any person by filing an application in a
prescribed form can seek protection under concerned district. The
authority then, from the Assistant Commissioner of Police or Deputy
Superintendent of Police should ask for a Threat Analysis Report of
the concerned in charge of the police sub division. As per the threat
perceived this report will then categorise the witness as follows:

1. When the threat extends to the life of the witness

2. When the threat extends to the safety, reputation or property of
the witness
3. Where the threat is moderate and extends to harassment or
intimidation of the witness

If the competent authority feels any urgency while preparing the

threat analysis report, it can pass an interim order for the protection of
the witness.

The law agencies should be made accountable for its implementation.

This is a very crucial step as to providing a straight forward formula
to be applied in every case without which would have ridiculed its
effectiveness. Therefore the witness protection may be as simple as
giving police protection to the witness till the courtroom using the
modern technology.

ATHEESHA M V
FIVE YEAR EIGHT SEMESTER
GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE, THRISSUR