Recording of pw - discrepancies

sunil (Querist) 22 March 2017 This query is : Resolved
Respected Members,

In a criminal case u/s 506, 509 on different dates the court noting has some discrepancies as under:

1) Accused was shown as “absent” whereas in PW1 deposition on the same date it is noted that accused (identified)

2) Next date was fixed because PP was absent but it is written that the accused was absent as such next date is given.

3) As per practice of the Hon’ble Court before deposition starts there is a call made for the accused and accused has to raise his hand to mark his “present” in the court room. And the 1st question asked by PP to the PW1 is “Is the accused present in the court room?” and the PW1 reply in affirmative and Hon’ble court makes a noted “accused (identified)”.

4) Deposition of PW was made in local language but it is translated into English by PP and written in summarized form which has changed the meaning of the deposition as well as dropped many important points which may go in favour of the accused.

5) PW4 in the Charge sheet has been recorded as PW2 in the form of recording deposition.

My humble questions – What accused can do in this situation? What precautions / remedies are available for the accused? How these are going to affect the case?

Thanks

Follow Query

Report Abuse

rajeev sharma (Expert) 24 March 2017
Subsequent to deposition person deposing has to sign the statement where he declares that he has read the deposition recorded and it is correct and true. If the statement is recorded in a language he has aright to got it explained by someone whom he believe.If the deposition is not recorded correctly please point it out to court and if court does not grant any relief appeal may be filed