RESEARCH PROJECT

School of Law, Mahindra University

TOPIC: Child Witnesses in Criminal Trials: An Analysis of Legal

Safeguards and Challenges.

As a part of the Internal assessment

For the Academic Year 2023-2024

Prepared & submitted by

M. keerthi (SL22ULBA021)

Submitted to Prof. (Dr.) V. BALAKISTA REDDY

Professor of Law & Dean and Professor Vivek Sehrawat

School of Law, Mahindra University

1
 Acknowledgment

First of all, I would like to thank, Prof. (Dr.) V. BALAKISTA REDDY Dean of
the School of Law at Mahindra University, for initiating the internal assessment as
a credit course, which has provided me with an incredible opportunity to work and
learn.

I would like to convey a sincere thanks to Professor Vivek Sehrawat for

his assistance on the topic and for sharing his thoughts on it.

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity of the School of Law, Mahindra University

which has provided us with helping every one of their students reach their full
potential. My research paper served as a source of ideas, a means of raising
awareness, sharing impact, validation, and career progress, and an avenue for field
contribution.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENT

S.
NO SUBJECT PAGE NUMBER

1 COVER PAGE 1

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENT 3

4 TABLE OF CASES 4

5 TABLE OF STATUTES 5

6 INTRODUCTION 6

7 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 7

8 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 7

9 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 7

10 HYPOTHESIS 8

11 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 8

12 TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION 8

13 INTRODUCTION 9-10

14 VULNERABLE WITNESSES AND CHILD 11

WITNESSES

15 EVOLUTION OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF CHILD 12-13

WITNESS TESTIMONIES

16 LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR CHILD 14-15

WITNESSES

17 CHALLENGES FACED BY CHILD WITNESSES 16-17

18 CONCLUSION 18

3
 TABLE OF CASES

1. Raju Devendra Choubey v. State of Chhatisgarh

2. Emperor v. Kusha
3. Suresh v. State of U.P.
4. Himmat Sukhadeo Wahurwagh v. State of Maharashtra
5. Tahal Singh v. Punjab
6. Jarina Khatun v. State of Assam
7. Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State of Maharashtra
8. State of Maharashtra Vs. Bandu
9. Suryanarayana v. State of Karnataka
10. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Krishna Master & Ors
11. State of Bihar v Hanuman Koeri
12. Suresh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
13. Chagan Dame v. State of Gujarat
14. Satish Kumar Gupta and Ors v. State of Haryana and Ors.
15. State v. Yenkappa
16. R v. Norbury
17. Jarina Khatun v. State of Assam
18. Pradeep v State of Haryana
19. State v. Rahul
20. Mahender Chawla v. Union of India
21. Wheeler v. United States

4
 TABLE OF STATUTES

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015:

Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973:

5
 INTRODUCTION

Child witnesses have played an important role in some of the most debated types of witness
cases. Because of their children and their potential to be influenced, they are assumed to be
naive, susceptible to tutoring, and susceptible to suggestion. This, however, should not be
understood as their incapability to remember incidents, especially if they were traumatic, or as
their provided evidence being dismissed. This paper aims to look into the concept of child
witnesses in India and how it has evolved. It aims to provide an in-depth analysis of when child
witnesses are accepted, what disadvantages previously existed about child witnesses, and what
mechanisms can be incorporated to ensure honest and dependable testimony from them.

To address these issues, the judicial system is constantly evolving, with a strong emphasis on the
importance of providing young witnesses with a safe and encouraging environment. Continuous
efforts to improve the overall experience of juvenile witnesses in criminal prosecutions are aided
by developments in forensic questioning methods and a growing understanding of the
psychological effects of courtroom proceedings.

6
 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The main topic of this study is whether or not child witnesses in criminal cases have sufficient
legal safeguards. There is concern about traumatization and procedural difficulties because
children are naturally vulnerable in courtroom environments. The purpose of this analysis is to
investigate and evaluate how current legislation measures the rights and welfare of child
witnesses.
One of the difficulties is balancing the vulnerability of the child with the demand for
information. Maintaining such balance is critical for avoiding trauma and preserving testimonies'
credibility. Furthermore, there may be doubts about the competence and trustworthiness of young
witnesses, raising questions about their ability to comprehend and accurately narrate.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

 To evaluate whether the current legal protections for child witnesses' rights are working.
 To list and evaluate the challenges that come with using the child witnesses in court.
 To Understand the admissibility of child witnesses.
 To understand the laws and guidelines governing witness statements made by children.
 To develop reforms and solutions for any issues concerning child witnesses.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

 Whether the legal system sufficiently provides the special requirements for child
witnesses
 Whether the possibility of traumatization of juvenile witnesses in criminal cases is
increased by legal problems.
 Whether landmark judgments have played an important role in shaping the evolution of
acceptance of child witness testimonies

7
 HYPOTHESIS

Despite existing legal safeguards, child witnesses may face inadequate trauma protection, limited
support services, and difficult court procedures, which may have an impact on their testimony
and trial fairness. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of current safeguards,
identify unique obstacles faced by marginalized children, and investigate other options to gain
reliable testimony to create a more supportive and just court system for child witnesses.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The Research Methodology was used to comprehend the fundamental principles and scope of the
theme of child witnesses in India, as well as Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and
also includes case law, existing statutes, and drafted and proposed roles. Sources such as
journals, articles, court decisions, and books, among other things, were used in the research.
Specifically, various case laws and landmark precedents have been examined to gain an
understanding of the theme at hand.
This study will use a mixed-methodologies approach for data collection, combining both
qualitative and quantitative techniques. Through a review of relevant legislation, case law, and
policy documents, the project will examine existing legal safeguards and support systems for
child witnesses in criminal prosecutions. In addition, formal interviews with legal professionals
(judges, attorneys, child advocates), child witnesses, and their families will be done to gather.

TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION

CHAPTER – I INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER - II VULNERABLE WITNESSES AND CHILD WITNESSES

CHAPTER -III EVOLUTION OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF CHILD WITNESS

TESTIMONIES

CHAPTER - IV LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR CHILD WITNESSES

CHAPTER - V CHALLENGES FACED BY CHILD WITNESSES

CHAPTER- VI CONCLUSION

8
 INTRODUCTION

Witnesses are essential to the criminal trial process. Their evidence can be very helpful in
establishing whether the accused is guilty or innocent. Their testimony might be the only thing
used in a particular situation to strengthen a conviction. Compared to other topics like rape,
domestic abuse, etc., witness protection is not a topic that receives as much discussion in India,
even though it is unfair and immoral. Because both sides in a case are aware that a single witness
has the power to move the verdict in their favor, witnesses are frequently threatened with
emotional blackmail or offered money in exchange for keeping silent and changing their
testimony. It is common to observe in these situations that witnesses who are minors or who are
experiencing additional challenges become victims. We relate to such individuals as vulnerable
witnesses. In a recent statement, the Supreme Court clarified what was meant by the term
"vulnerable witness."
The term ‘witness’ has not been defined in the INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, of 1872 but reading
the other sections of the act we can infer that anyone who provides testimony who acts as a
source of evidence before the court of law can be considered a witness. Witnesses often provide
valuable information which helps the Court decide the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Accordingly, a witness must be reliable and competent. According to s.118 of the Act, any person
can be a witness in a court of law as long as they can comprehend the questions put to them and
provide rational answers to those questions. The Act does not lay down any rules about the
minimum age of a witness therefore even a child can be a witness under this Act. If the Court is
convinced that a small child, even at the age of 6 or 7, is capable of providing a reasonable
testimony, then the child may testify. The only person who saw the murder in the case of Raju
Devendra Choubey v. State of Chhatisgarh 1was a 13-year-old house servant who was
employed at the time of the incident. He identified the defendants in the court. However, because
the case against the accused could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and they had no
prior enmity with the dead person, they were found not guilty. In this case, the Supreme Court
ruled that since the accused raised the child and gave him food, shelter, clothes, and education,
the child had no basis to falsely accuse the accused. Therefore, the testimony of a child cannot be
considered as untrue. However, Section 4(1) of the Oaths, Act, 1969 states that a witness under
the age of 12 cannot be administered an oath. Any child who passes the competency test and is
aware that they must tell the truth can testify as a witness under Section 118 of the Act. The Privy
Council ruled in the Emperor v. Kusha 2Yamaji Sutar case that: "A child's ignorance of
something like the meaning of a solemn affirmation is not always the same as their incapacity to
comprehend everyday questions and provide thoughtful responses." The Supreme Court has
1
AIR2014SC3741
2
5 Bom L.R. 551.

9
ruled in the historic Suresh v. State of U.P.3 case that a 5-year-old's testimony is admissible
because the child can comprehend and understand the question. The court further declared that
the child's testimony would be accepted provided they could comprehend and understand the
question. The Supreme Court ruled in Himmat Sukhadeo Wahurwagh v. State of
Maharashtra4 that a child ought to be able to distinguish between right and wrong. He needs to
be aware of his obligation to speak the truth and the sacredness of the oath. VOR DIRE TEST:
When a minor testifies, the courts ensure that the witness can understand the meaning of the
oath, is intelligent enough to provide reliable testimony, and can reason through moral dilemmas.
Generally, the courts resolve the dispute during this decision-making process. The "Voir Dire
test" is a widely recognized solution to improve this. The meaning of the words is that which is.
The test consists of a series of unrelated questions to examine a child's intellectual development
and comprehension in daily life to determine how truthful their answers are regarding the case at
hand. "If the child is unable to respond to inquiries in a satisfactory manner, it impacts his
witness credibility. In Tahal Singh v. Punjab, 51347, the Supreme Court made the following
observation: It is difficult to imagine a child in our country, especially in rural areas, carrying a
load of thirteen years. The great majority of boys that age go to work in fields. They can
comprehend the importance of the oath and the need to tell the truth.
Jarina Khatun v. State of Assam6 1992 Cr LJ 733 made a crucial observation in this regard:
the Trial Court is the best judge to determine the competency of a witness in this case because
the child appears before the court. As a result, it has a chance to see him, take note of his
behavior, and document his proof.

3
Suresh v. State of U.P., (2001) 3 SCC 673
4
Himmat Sukhadeo Wahurwagh v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 6 SCC 712
5
AIR 1979 SC
6
AIR 1978 SC 1248

10
 VULNERABLE WITNESSES AND CHILD WITNESSES

During the hearing of a special leave petition in the Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State of
Maharashtra7 and Anr. (2019) case, the Supreme Court made an oral observation suggesting
that the term "vulnerable witness" may not be limited to child witnesses. This was about the
Delhi High Court Guidelines on the protection of vulnerable witnesses, which define a
vulnerable witness as a child who has not reached the age of eighteen (18) in Section 3. Section
118 of the Indian Evidence Act does not define vulnerable witnesses. Certain measures for the
protection of vulnerable witnesses were mentioned in the UK's Youth Justice and Criminal
Evidence Act 1999. Certain individuals are incapable of providing testimony or evidence in court
because of extra challenges, such as mental illnesses, physical disabilities, or incapacity resulting
from cognitive impairments, and they are younger than eighteen years old. We refer to these
individuals as vulnerable witnesses. State of Maharashtra Vs. Bandu's8 victim was a deaf and
mute 1 -year-old girl who was raped by accused Bandu. The Supreme Court quashed the
defendant's sentence on the ground that the victim was not cross-examined. The case reached the
Supreme Administrative Court, which found that although the victim was not interviewed, there
was enough evidence that the defendant raped her. After issuing the order, the court considered
the proposal to create special research centers for the interrogation of defenseless witnesses, so
that they are comfortable in testifying. The court further requested and required the establishment
of reception centers for defenseless witnesses. In a recent development, the Supreme Court in
2017 ordered the immediate establishment of at least two Vulnerable Witness Centers under the
jurisdiction of each High Court and No. 039. These centers are created primarily for child
witnesses and victims who have witnessed heinous crimes such as rape, sexual assault, etc., and
need protection. These centers have all the safeguards to ensure the safe protection of witnesses.
However, the guidelines for a child witness have been established by the court in Sakshi v. Union
of India. The guidelines state that the following protocols must be followed when gathering
testimony from a child witness:
 The judges will permit the use of a videotaped interview in which the child testifies in
front of a child support worker.
 A child might be allowed to testify anonymously via closed-circuit television or from
behind a screen to get a truthful and open description of the actions that have been
reported.

7
Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State of Maharashtra, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 2122

8
AIR2017SC5414

11
  After the minor has been examined, only the judge should be permitted to cross-examine
the minor based on the written questions provided by the defense.

EVOLUTION OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF CHILD WITNESS

TESTIMONIES

In the history of the Indian judiciary, several significant rulings have changed the courts' point of
view on the admissibility of child witnesses' testimony. Various courts in India made peculiar,
one-of-a-kind rulings that altered the situation with child witnesses. Development and acceptance
have been made possible by several landmark judgments. The main distinction is the acceptance
of child witnesses, frequently at younger ages due to the credibility and partiality of such
testimonies held, even though the decisions were made at different times based on different
subjects and crimes. The following three main areas of inquiry are essential to understanding the
landmark case of Suryanarayana v. State of Karnataka9 and have played a significant role in
the development of the acceptance of child witness testimony:
1. Age.
2. tutoring
3. competency
According to the ruling in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Krishna Master & Ors10, there is no legal
principle that states that a young child can't recall everything they have seen from memory.
When it comes to unusual and traumatic events, a child is unquestionably sensitive and aware,
and these kinds of memories typically stick with them for the rest of their lives. When asked,
there's a good chance the child could give an extremely accurate account of what transpired. If
the child can provide a clear explanation of the events without trying to add any extraneous
details and is deemed to instill some trust in the court system, then there is no need for
confirmation. A young child is nearly incapable of growing up or holding any kind of enmity
toward other people. There has been an application of the principle of assessing each case as an
individual matter and examining the credibility of the child witness on a case-by-case basis about
the age being established as a standard for acceptance.
In the case of State of Bihar v Hanuman Koeri,11 it was noted that an eight-year-old child was
considered unreliable as a witness due to their incapacity to understand the questions posed.
Suresh v. State of Uttar Pradesh: There has been progress in that regard. In 1981,51 the Court
ruled that a child as young as five years old may give testimony if they can understand what is
going on and respond appropriately. Age is irrelevant; instead, each case must be evaluated based
on intellectual capacities.
9
AIR2001SC482
10
AIR2010SC3071
11
State of Bihar v. Hanuman Koeri (Singh), 1968 SCC OnLine Pat 115

12
Tutoring

It is well known that one of the most basic presumptions about child witnesses was that they
were vulnerable to exploitation. At that time, the Supreme Court stated that when there is a
chance that a child is receiving tutoring, courts should proceed cautiously and that such
testimony can be partially or completely rejected. The court held in Chagan Dame v. State of
Gujarat12 that a child witness's testimony needs to be verified and that the proof of the child
witness who was thought to be receiving tutoring was not trustworthy. In Satish Kumar Gupta
and Ors v. State of Haryana and Ors. the Hon. Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a
woman for killing her husband based on their 12-year-old son's testimony. It was decided that
there was no evidence of tutoring because the son had seen his father brutally murdered by a
group of hired assassins. Furthermore, the defendant in State v. Yenkappa 13was found guilty of
killing his wife based only on the testimonies of his children. When the Court was asked to
consider whether to admit such evidence, it decided that while it should exercise caution to
prevent innocent people from being punished purely for the testimony of minor children because
they are easily influenced, the testimony of the children, in this case, cannot be disregarded for
that reason alone. It is not abnormal for the kids to be at the house, so it is not strange that they
are watching this happen.
Competency
The question of whether a child witness is considered to be mature enough to understand the
question put to him during the trial is a principle that varies across jurisdictions due to the degree
of subjectivity and idiosyncrasies involved. The R v. Norbury14 case is one of the first
judgments, an important turning case, and an important precedent for common law countries. in
the case, the testimony of a young child who had experienced the horrible crime of rape firsthand
was acknowledged and admitted. Regarding the child's competency, the Privy Council declared
that even if the child is incapable of understanding the oath itself, as long as the child can assure
and give logical answers to the questions asked, then the testimony will be accepted without any
kind of corroboration.
It was stated in Jarina Khatun v. State of Assam15 that would be the most Trial Court qualified
judge to determine a child's competency. In these situations, the court may watch the child, take
note of their behavior, record their testimony, and then, following close examination, accept it.

12
AIR1994SC454
13
State v. Yenkappa (2003) CRI LJ 3558.
14
R v. Norbury, (1978) Crim. LR 435
15
Musst. Jarina Khatun v. State of Assam, 1991 SCC OnLine Gau 7

13
 LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR CHILD WITNESSES

In the criminal justice system, child witnesses also have difficulties. They might be more
vulnerable to suggestibility, trauma, and other conditions that could impair their capacity to give
credible and accurate testimony. Because of this, the criminal justice system has put in place
several unique safeguards to protect child witnesses and guarantee their equitable treatment.
Safeguarding child witnesses requires the implementation of several essential precautions to
protect their well-being and ensure the accuracy of their testimonies. The precautions are as
follows-
Specialized Interviewing Techniques
When questioning child witnesses, trained professionals should employ non-leading and child-
friendly interviewing techniques. By reducing the possibility of coercion or suggestion, these
methods guarantee that the child's testimony is truthful and pure.
Supportive Environment
It's critical to establish a secure and encouraging atmosphere for young witnesses. A welcoming
and comfortable interview environment will put the child at ease and increase the likelihood that
they will share their experiences. Having a family member or other trusted adult nearby can offer
comfort and emotional support while going through the process.
Age-Appropriate Communication
Using language appropriate to the age and stage of development of child witnesses is essential to
effective communication. Legal professionals should modify their language and communication
style to correspond with the child's understanding. This guarantees that the child can understand
and comprehend the questions and instructions.
Avoiding Leading Questions
Leading questions can inadvertently influence a child’s testimony. Interviewers and legal
professionals should avoid asking leading questions that suggest a particular response. Open-
ended questions that encourage the child to provide their narrative should be used instead,
allowing for unbiased and accurate information.
Psychological Support
Being involved in legal proceedings can cause emotional distress or even trauma for child
witnesses. To help the child deal with any emotional difficulties that may arise, it is imperative to
give them access to psychological support services like counseling or therapy. This helps
improve their well-being and lessens any detrimental effects on their mental health.

14
Privacy and Confidentiality
It is essential to safeguard the confidentiality and privacy of child witnesses. To avoid potential
harm or retaliation, their identities and testimonies should be kept private. Strict procedures
should be followed to guarantee that the child's information is kept private and out of the hands
of unauthorized people. In the case of Pradeep v State of Haryana, 16The Supreme Court
highlights how important it is for trial courts to properly interview child witnesses in the early
stages of gathering evidence before recording them. Trial courts uphold the integrity and
credibility of the legal system by prioritizing the defense of their rights, the course of justice, and
the creation of a fair and equal legal system. Courts can guarantee the honesty and accuracy of
child witness testimony by conducting thorough evaluations of the witness's competence,
understanding, and vulnerabilities.
Several laws have been enacted to safeguard the integrity of evidence and witnesses who are
children since related to the easy manipulation and victimization of children's sensitive nature.
The Juvenile Justice Act 2015 (JJ Act) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act
2012 (POCSO Act) both refer to these laws and provide particular instructions on how to handle
child witnesses. Although the JJ Act does not specify a specific procedure for handling child
witnesses, it does specify the following:
 Police officers must not wear their uniforms while interviewing child witnesses.
 Such interviews must be done by the Special Juvenile Police Unit as they are well-trained
in how to deal with children.
 Child Welfare Committees must take cognizance of any violations done by the
authorities.
Certain guidelines regarding the treatment of child witnesses are also specified by the POCSO
Act.
 All interviews are to be conducted in a safe and child-friendly atmosphere.
 The child should not be made to recount the same incident relentlessly
 A person well versed in counseling must be present to reduce possible trauma or stress
that might set into the child while producing the evidence.
In addition to these laws, the Delhi High Court created a set of rules known as the
"Guidelines for Recording the Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses in Criminal Matters" in the
State v. Rahul case. These guidelines specify how to record testimony from witnesses in
cases where children are involved. It is divided into 39 sections that are specifically designed
to shield the children from possible identification and provide additional safeguards for child
witnesses. A bench of Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit of the Supreme Court affirmed this
ruling and praised the Delhi High Court's efforts by directing the creation of examination
centers for vulnerable witnesses in each High Court jurisdiction. In the Mahender Chawla
v. Union of India17 case, the Supreme Court provided additional support for this. All High

16
AIR2014SC2694
17
Mahender Chawla v. Union of India, 2016 SCC OnLine SC 1778

15
 Courts were instructed by the Ministry of Home Affairs to establish special examination
centers that are considered vulnerable witnesses in criminal cases.

CHALLENGES FACED BY CHILD WITNESSES

Based on the studies The purpose is to reduce the long-term effects and secondary traumatization
of children who testify about the violence they have experienced or witnessed, based on research
on the psychological and physiological effects of children experiencing and witnessing violence,
as well as appearing in court. 18 The majority of the scientific literature focuses on the specific
circumstances in which children who have been the victims of physical or sexual abuse or who
have witnessed violent acts appear in court. This statement primarily addresses these cases. In
some circumstances, it might apply to children who have to testify in court regarding custody
disputes or child welfare cases. It doesn't cover children who show up in court as offenders or as
part of the juvenile justice system. A man who was charged with rape and sexual harassment was
recently acquitted by the Bombay High Court. Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offenses Act as well as sections 376 and 354 (A) (1) (i) of the Indian Penal Code
had been brought against him. The child is "prone to telling imaginative and exaggerated
stories," according to the court which might us think about what kind of mental and emotional
stress the child would’ve gone through. In the context of a relationship involving responsibility,
trust, or power, child abuse or maltreatment includes all forms of physical and/or emotional
abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, careless treatment, and commercial or other forms of exploitation
that actually or potentially endangers the child's health, survival, development, or dignity. In this
instance, the child experiences stress, which can affect the development of the immune system,
nervous system, and early stages of the brain. In the 1895 Wheeler v. United States19 case, the
United States Supreme Court allowed a five-and-a-half-year-old child to testify in court as a
witness to provide reliable testimony. This was the first time a child had been permitted to testify
in court. However, the court established that relying on a child witness is dependent on the
child's ability, intelligence, and ability to distinguish between fact and fiction. Comparably, any
individual including a child is deemed competent to testify in court under Section 118 of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provided the child can comprehend the questions and give a reasoned
response. The effect of having the child testify in court is the prime issue. The child is anxious
about appearing before the judge and, more importantly, is afraid of the defendant, which
worsens other fears such as being harmed by the defendant, embarrassing oneself in front of
others by crying or not being able to respond, and the most terrifying fear of being taken to jail.
This means
that the advocate who is questioning the child needs to be kind and provide them with an
intelligible and persuasive explanation of the proceedings. Medical professionals play an
important role because they can listen to the child's worries, reassure them that they won't be
18
Justice in matters involving child victims and witnesses of crime, (Dec. 23, 2009)
19
Wheeler v. United States, 226 U.S. 478 (1913)

16
mistreated, and assist the family in introducing the child to the court system. Taking such actions
will aid in preventing the occurrence of trauma exposure, which is classified as Type I and Type
II based on traumatic events, adversities, and daily stressors. In real life, a terrifying, once-in-a-
lifetime event is referred to as Type I trauma. Conversely, Type II trauma describes the daily
stresses and adversities that a child may experience, such as having to endure the pain and
anguish of testifying repeatedly in appeal cases. If this last appeal is filed with the Supreme
Court, the scenario may also occur in this particular case. Legal scholars and psychologists
disagree over whether involving children directly in criminal court proceedings amounts to
secondary victimization for the victims. through the study, it has been stated that Certain key
aspects of children's legal experiences were related to children's distress and capacity for
communication in court. These include giving multiple testimonials, going through numerous
interviews, being confused about the legal system, working cases, and cases ending up with bad
outcomes. Additionally, research has revealed that, when implemented without negatively
impacting case outcomes, can lessen children's distress and enhance their communication. The
most important activities include the use of support persons, procedures that decrease the
frequency of child interviews or the requirement for child testimony, and pre-trial education
programs aimed at improving children's comprehension of the legal case.

17
 CONCLUSION

For criminal justice proceedings to be effective, child victims and witnesses must participate. To
stop more suffering and trauma, those children are especially vulnerable and require extra
protection, help, and support. To preserve their dignity, child victims and witnesses must be
given the proper acknowledgment and care. "Witnesses are the eyes and ears of Justice," Jeremy
Bentham rightly says. Witnesses' rights must be protected, and they must be adequately
protected. A witness must witness everything, from the crime scene to the courtroom. To make
matters worse, the accused subjects them to death threats, coercion, harassment, and other forms
of abuse. Vulnerable witnesses are more likely to suffer as a result of their testimony To avoid
this, the Indian government's position is important. The administration's Witness Protection
Scheme 2018, as well as the establishment of separate vulnerable witness deposition centers, are
significant and effective steps. Interventions based on their circumstances ought to be beneficial.
When it comes to children who have been sexually exploited, this is especially important. To
summarize, we conclude that, where necessary to protect a child witness from trauma caused by
testifying in the defendant's physical presence, at least where such trauma would impair the
child's ability to communicate, the Confrontation Clause does not deprive the use of a procedure
that, despite the absence of face-to-face confrontation, ensures the reliability of the evidence by
subjecting it to rigorous adversarial testing and thus preserves the essence of the evidence.
Because there is no doubt that the child witnesses in this case testified under oath, were subjected
to extensive cross-examination, and could be observed by the judge. Several Legal safeguards
are in place in India to protect child witnesses and guarantee their equitable treatment within the
criminal justice system. Nevertheless, the implementation of these safeguards is not always
effective, and child witnesses still encounter difficulties when navigating the legal system. To
avoid this, the Indian government's position is important. The administration's Witness Protection
Scheme 2018, as well as the establishment of separate vulnerable witness deposition centers, are
significant and effective steps. it is determined that the role of a child witness has unquestionably
evolved since their involvement in court matters began. Children play an important role in the
adjudication of a criminal matter when the Court observes it, as in the case of Suryanarayana v.
State of Karnataka20 Courts in India have been open to the idea of, and have been practicing,
evaluating each child witness and each case on an individual basis. The courts preach individual
analysis and will accept a child's evidence if it is found to be credible, reliable, and rational.
However, it is also critical to recognize the child witness's protection. Whether they are victims
or not, they require additional protection and resources to recover from trauma.

20
AIR2001SC482

18
19