Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Liladhar Kanad, is facing trial for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and other allied offences in Sessions Case No.44/2021 before the 5th Additional District and Sessions Court, Kachchh at Bhuj. On 03.03.2025, during the examination-in-chief of prosecution witness no.32 (the Investigating Officer), the Special Public Prosecutor showed certain CCTV footage to the witness from the hard-disk Exhibit-423. When the petitioner's advocate sought permission to show the same CCTV footage to the witness during cross-examination, the trial court dismissed the request on the ground that it would be time-consuming. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's advocate argued that the petitioner did not intend to show the entire footage but only relevant parts, and that the witness being the last prosecution witness, it was necessary for the defence to effectively cross-examine him. The advocate also pointed out that the trial court had observed that it would grant permission only if the High Court passed an order. The High Court, after hearing the petitioner's advocate, held that the trial court's order was contrary to the principle of equal opportunity and fair trial. The court noted that the prosecution had been permitted to show the footage during examination-in-chief, and the accused must be given a similar opportunity for effective cross-examination. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the trial court to permit the petitioner to show the relevant parts of the CCTV footage to the witness, subject to the condition that the petitioner ensures that only relevant portions are shown and the process is completed expeditiously.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right to Fair Trial - Cross-Examination - Equal Opportunity - The trial court's refusal to allow the accused to show CCTV footage to the Investigating Officer during cross-examination, solely on the ground of time consumption, violates the principle of equal opportunity and fair trial - The prosecution was permitted to show the same footage during examination-in-chief, and the accused must be given a similar opportunity for effective cross-examination - Held that the impugned order is quashed and the trial court is directed to permit the accused to show relevant parts of the CCTV footage to the witness (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's refusal to allow the accused to show CCTV footage to the prosecution witness (Investigating Officer) during cross-examination, on the ground that it would be time-consuming, violates the accused's right to a fair trial and equal opportunity for defence.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order dated 03.03.2025, and directed the trial court to permit the petitioner to show the relevant parts of the CCTV footage to the witness during cross-examination, subject to the condition that the petitioner ensures only relevant portions are shown and the process is completed expeditiously.
Law Points
- Right to fair trial
- Equal opportunity for defence
- Cross-examination rights
- Production of electronic evidence
- Section 302 IPC
- Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India
Case Details
R/Special Criminal Application (Direction) No. 6259 of 2025
Pratik Y. Jasani for the petitioner, Public Prosecutor for the respondent
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition challenging trial court's order refusing to allow accused to show CCTV footage to prosecution witness during cross-examination.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner seeks quashing of the trial court's order dated 03.03.2025 and direction to permit showing of CCTV footage to the witness during cross-examination.
Filing Reason
Trial court refused permission to show CCTV footage to the Investigating Officer during cross-examination on the ground of time consumption, while the prosecution had been allowed to show the same footage during examination-in-chief.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (5th Additional District and Sessions Court, Kachchh at Bhuj) passed the impugned order on 03.03.2025 in Sessions Case No.44/2021.
Issues
Whether the trial court's refusal to allow the accused to show CCTV footage to the prosecution witness during cross-examination violates the right to fair trial and equal opportunity for defence.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's advocate submitted that the prosecution was permitted to show CCTV footage to the witness during examination-in-chief, but the same was denied to the defence during cross-examination on the ground of time consumption. The petitioner only intended to show relevant parts, not the entire footage. The witness is the Investigating Officer and the last prosecution witness, making cross-examination crucial for defence. The trial court observed it would grant permission only if the High Court passes an order.
Ratio Decidendi
The principle of equal opportunity and fair trial requires that if the prosecution is permitted to show electronic evidence to a witness during examination-in-chief, the accused must be given a similar opportunity during cross-examination. The trial court's refusal on the ground of time consumption is not justified, especially when the accused offers to show only relevant parts. The right to cross-examine effectively is an essential component of a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Trial Court dismissed the request submitted on behalf of the petitioner on the ground that showing the CCTV footage again to the witness is time consuming.
The petitioner does not intend to show the entire CCTV footage to the witness. The petitioner would like to show only the relevant parts of the CCTV footage to the witness for further cross-examination.
The learned Trial Court while rejecting the request made on behalf of the petitioner, has observed in the order that he would grant such permission only if this Court passes an order.
Procedural History
The petitioner is facing trial in Sessions Case No.44/2021 before the 5th Additional District and Sessions Court, Kachchh at Bhuj. On 03.03.2025, during examination-in-chief of PW-32 (Investigating Officer), the prosecution showed CCTV footage. The petitioner's request to show the same footage during cross-examination was rejected by the trial court on the same day. The petitioner then filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution before the Gujarat High Court, which was heard and decided on 25.02.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302
- Constitution of India, 1950: 226, 227
