Cross-examination of witness should be deferred only in exceptional cases: Supreme Court to trial courts

The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked trial courts to desist from granting long adjournments after examination-in-chief of witnesses, cautioning that such delays may affect the fairness of the trial and even endanger the safety of the witness. [Surender Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi)]..The bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Rajesh Bindal stressed that as far as possible, the defence should be asked to cross examine the witness on the same day or the following day after the chief examination."Only in very exceptional cases, and for reasons to be recorded, the cross examination should be deferred and a short adjournment can be given after taking precautions and care, for the witness, if it is required," the Court said..The Court explained that it was constrained to highlight this aspect as it had noticed cross-examinations being adjourned routinely by trial courts in case after case."This Court had, on more than one occasion, condemned this practice of the trial court where examinations are deferred without sufficient reasons," the bench said while referring to the earlier rulings.Thus, it reiterated that a request for deferral must be premised on sufficient reasons, justifying the deferral of cross-examination of the witness..The Court was hearing an appeal filed by a former police guard against his conviction and life sentence in a murder case. Surender Singh, the convict, had been found guilty of murdering a man, alleged to have been in an illicit relationship with his wife, inside the Mayur Vihar Police Station in 2002. After his conviction was upheld by Delhi High Court in 2011, he moved the Supreme Court. .The prosecution case was largely based on the statement of an eye-witness - a lady head constable who was also injured in the incident. While analysing the record, the Court found that she had not been immediately cross-examined after the examination-in-chief. It was in this context the top court made observations against delaying cross-examination of witnesses. "We only wanted to record this cautionary note to make our point that this practice is not a healthy practice and the Courts should be slow in deferring these matters. The mandate of Section 231 of Cr.PC and the law laid down on the subject referred above must be followed in its letter and spirit," the bench said.However, the Court also noted that deferment in cross examination of the eye-witness had not affected the trial. The witness had remained consistent, it said..The Court also found other evidences against Singh to be unassailable and held the present case to be a clear case of murder."The motive for the appellant (admittedly the deceased was having an affair with the appellant’s wife), and the execution of the crime at the Police Station, all point towards the murder committed inside the police station by the present appellant. The one fire arm injury with blackening at the entry point also explains that the deceased was first shot from a close range," it said.Rejecting the defence argument of self defence and the alternate plea of grave and sudden provocation, the Court said there was not even an iota of evidence to sustain "this bizarre line" of defence."The case of the defence that the deceased came to the Police Station “unarmed” to kill the appellant knowing very well that the appellant was armed with a weapon is an awkward attempt to present the deceased as the aggressor. It does not make any sense," it said while dismissing the appeal..Singh had been granted bail by the top court in 2012. With dismissal of his appeal, he was directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today..Advocate Arun K Sinha appeared for the convict.Advocate Mukesh Kumar Maroria appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]