Bombay High Court Flags "Dangerous Culture" of Police Copy-Pasting Witness Statements in Criminal Cases

Introduction

In a significant judicial observation, the Bombay High Court has raised serious concerns over the prevalent practice among police officers of copy-pasting witness statements in criminal cases. The court termed this trend a "dangerous culture" that could potentially undermine the integrity of the criminal justice system and inadvertently benefit the accused. This commentary emerged during the hearing of a case involving the alleged abetment of suicide of a minor, prompting the court to take suo motu cognizance of the issue and direct the state government to formulate specific guidelines to address this malpractice.

Background of the Case

The matter came to light during the hearing of a petition filed by five individuals seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against them for allegedly abetting the suicide of a 17-year-old girl in Jalgaon district. Initially recorded as an accidental death under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the case was later escalated to an offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) upon discovering the girl's age. Subsequently, Section 305 IPC, pertaining to the abetment of suicide by a minor, was also invoked. The petitioners approached the High Court seeking relief, but upon noting the court's reluctance to grant it, they withdrew their application.

Court's Observations on Investigative Practices

During the examination of the chargesheet, the division bench comprising Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh observed that the witness statements were strikingly similar, with paragraphs starting and ending with identical words. This raised doubts about the authenticity of the statements and whether the witnesses were actually called for questioning. The court remarked that such practices are not isolated incidents but are prevalent in various cases, including those under Section 498-A of the IPC, which deals with domestic violence. The bench emphasized that this "copy-paste" approach could dilute the seriousness of genuine cases and potentially provide undue advantage to the accused.

Suo Motu Cognizance and Directions to the State

Taking suo motu cognizance of the issue, the High Court highlighted the need to understand the shortcomings or difficulties faced by investigating officers that lead to such practices. The bench directed the Maharashtra government to issue specific guidelines for police officials on how to record witness statements accurately and authentically. The court appointed Advocate Mukul Kulkarni as amicus curiae to assist in this matter, tasking him with collecting data and suggesting measures to improve the quality of investigations and prevent the recurrence of such issues. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on June 27, 2025.

Implications for the Criminal Justice System

The High Court's observations underscore the critical importance of maintaining the integrity of investigative processes. The practice of duplicating witness statements not only questions the credibility of the investigation but also poses a threat to the fair administration of justice. Such lapses can lead to the weakening of prosecution cases, potentially resulting in the acquittal of guilty parties and erosion of public trust in the legal system. The court's proactive stance serves as a call to action for law enforcement agencies to uphold the highest standards of professionalism and diligence in their investigative duties.

Conclusion

The Bombay High Court's intervention highlights a pressing issue within the criminal justice system—the need for meticulous and honest investigative practices. By addressing the "dangerous culture" of copy-pasting witness statements, the court aims to reinforce the foundational principles of justice and ensure that the rights of all parties are protected. The directives issued to the Maharashtra government and the appointment of an amicus curiae reflect a comprehensive approach to reforming investigative procedures and restoring public confidence in the legal process.

Court Practice Community

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community