Read Time: 06 minutes
The high court while rejecting the plea to transfer the case to another judge said that there was no material on record to show that the present trial court was biased.
A single judge bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice PD Naik has recently lifted the stay on the trial in the murder case of Advocate Shahid Azmi who was killed in 2010 at his office.
The high court was hearing an appeal filed by one of the accused Hasmukh Solanki for transferring the trial case from one court to another court.
Solanki in its appeal had contended that during the cross-examination of one of the witnesses, the witness had acted rudely and arrogantly while answering the questions. He claimed that the witness accused the advocate of Solanki that he was deliberately harassing him and the witness said that he would not appear on the next date if, the matter is adjourned. After the advocate asked the court to take the same on record, the court showed its disinclination for the same.
However, the court rejected Solanki’s appeal while stating that the material on record did not show sufficient evidence to show that the trial court was biased. The order read,
“However, the material on record is not sufficient to draw the conclusion that the trial Court is biased against the applicant and that he would not get fair trial before the said Court. No case is made out for transfer of investigation. In the event the aforesaid witness or any other witness is found rude, arrogant while answering questions in cross-examination or otherwise, the trial Court is expected to caution him or reprimand him.”
The court also said that the trial court is in charge of the proceedings and shall reprimand witnesses if they act arrogantly or misbehave.
“It is true that the trial Court is the in-charge of the Court proceedings and required to control the proceedings. If it is found that, the witness is misbehaving or arrogant, avoiding answering question, abhorrent and rude, it is for the trial Court to caution him and or reprimand him.”
The court said that the witness cannot be allowed to browbeat and the defence should endeavor to defend the case while bringing the truth on record. The order stated,
“The witness is expected to be courteous while answering questions put to him during examinationin-chief or cross examination. While cross-examination the endevour of defense is to defend the accused by bringing truth on record. The witness cannot be allowed to brow-beat. The dignity of the advocate representing the accused should be maintained during the crossexamination and the witnesses cannot be permitted to cross their limits.”
Advocate Shahid Azmi was in Tihar Jail for a period of 7 years after he was charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act for involvement in the 1992 Bombay Riots. However, his acquittal was upheld by the Supreme Court. During his 7 years in jail, he obtained his LLB degree and went on to represent the several accused in Malegoan Blast Case, the 7/11 Mumbai Trian Blast, Aurangabad Arms Haul Case, and Ghatkopar Blasts Case.
Case Title: Hasmukh Solanki vs State of Maharashtra
Statue: Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
Please Login or Register
