AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat high court has questioned the National Investigation Agency (NIA) why it intends to examine 41 more witnesses in a trial already underway in connection with the printing of fake currency after the 2016 demonetization.
A couple of months ago, the HC had advised the NIA and the special court not to insist on examining unnecessary witnesses, to focus on quality evidence, and to try not to prolong the trial.
The high court questioned the NIA after an accused person challenged a special court’s order of September 30 permitting the prosecuting agency to examine 41 witnesses.
Accused Ketan Dave’s counsel Zubin Bharda submitted that the prosecution changed the list of its witnesses on five occasions. The lawyer questioned the trial court’s permission granted under the provisions of Section 311 of the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) to the NIA to examine 41 more witnesses.
The first list contained 70 witnesses. Twenty-one of them have been examined. Later, the list went up to 147 witnesses, the lawyer submitted.
After the preliminary hearing on Monday, the bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice Niral Mehta made an observation. “It is by now a settled position of law that the power to summon any person as a witness…,” the bench said, “…or asking him to attend the court or recall or re-examine him under Section 311 of the CrPC must be exercised judiciously and with caution and valid reasons.”
The court went on to question, “We would like to know from the prosecuting agency in what manner all the witnesses named in exhibit-152 [NIA’s application before the trial court] is essential to the just decision in this case.”
The HC has sought an answer from the prosecuting agency by next week.
Earlier, in response to a bail application filed by a co-accused in this case, Shaileshbhai Barvadiya, the HC had observed that the prosecution should insist on quality evidence and not on quantity. The court said the prosecution should refrain from unnecessarily examining a large number of witnesses, which causes a delay in trial and looks bad on part of the judiciary.
That is against the interest of the accused and the victims too, the court said. The high court had also requested the chief justice to appoint two more special judges to look after seven NIA cases.
At present, the principal sessions judge is a designated NIA judge and she is busy with other cases as well as with administrative responsibilities.
