Read Time: 05 minutes

Noting that a DVD recorded by the Investigating Agency in a case was played and published in a program named “Sutta Mutta” by Udaya TV, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that all matters relating to the crime and whether a particular thing happens to be a conclusive piece of evidence must be dealt with by a Court of Law and not through a TV channel.

The bench of Justice UU Lalit further noted,

"Allowing said DVD to go into the hands of a private TV channel so that it could be played and published in a program is nothing but dereliction of duty and direct interference in the administration of Justice."

"If at all there was a voluntary statement, the matter would be dealt with by the Court of Law. The public platform is not a place for such debate or proof of what otherwise is the exclusive domain and function of Courts of law. Any such debate or discussion touching upon matters which are in the domain of Courts would amount to direct interference in administration of Criminal Justice", added the Top Court.

While dealing with an appeal against High Court's order filed by the four persons accused of dacoity, the Court was informed that their voluntary statements recorded by the Investigating Officer on a DVD, were played and published in a TV program and such a statement recorded on DVD was held to be in the nature of a confession to a Police Officer by the Trial Court.

However, the top court said, "If at all the accused were desirous of making confessions, the Investigating Machinery could have facilitated recording of confession by producing them before a Magistrate for appropriate action in terms of Section 164 of the Code."

Also, Court noted that the Trial Court not only extracted the entire statements but also relied upon them. Court, thus, held that all the earlier facts narrated in the statement about past history which were in the nature of self-implication would be inadmissible as amounting to a confession made to a Police Officer.

"...we have repeatedly found a tendency on part of the Prosecuting Agency in getting the entire statement recorded rather than only that part of the statement which leads to the discovery of facts. In the process, a confession of an accused which is otherwise hit by the principles of Evidence Act finds its place on record. Such kind of statements may have a direct tendency to influence and prejudice the mind of the Court. This practice must immediately be stopped....", said Court.

Case Title: VENKATESH @ CHANDRA & ANR. ETC. vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA