Bombay High Court allows litigant to record evidence in Tamil
The Bombay High Court has allowed a litigant who said she was not
familiar with Marathi, Hindi or English to depose in Tamil during the
recording of evidence. It also granted her permission to use an
interpreter.
Koothayee Adimulam Harijan had moved the High Court after the sessions
court rejected her request to record her evidence through an interpreter
since she only spoke Tamil.
Justice R.P. Sondurbaldota, in her order, said Ms. Harijan’s long stay
in Mumbai may have given her some working knowledge of Hindi. “But when
she has to depose in a court of law, in proceedings initiated on her
complaint, it is necessary that she gets an opportunity to depose in a
language she is most comfortable in.”
Ms. Sondurbaldota said section 277 of the code of criminal procedure,
1973, made a specific provision for the purpose. “Sub-section (b)
thereof requires that if a witness gives evidence in any language other
than the language of the court, it may, if practicable, be taken down in
that language.” If it that was not practicable, a true translation of
the evidence in the language of the court should be prepared during the
examination of the witness. “Such translation is required to be signed
by the Magistrate or the presiding judge, which would then form part of
the record,” she said.
The accused told the sessions court that Ms. Harijan had appeared before
other courts earlier and communicated in Hindi. The judge too noted
that the applicant had been residing in Mumbai for the last 23 years and
it was highly improbable that she did not know the language. Moreover,
she had written to the Malvani police station in Hindi. Ms. Harijan’s
counsel Mahesh Vaswani told the High Court that the letter was written
by another person she had merely signed it.
It is a welcome development and the judiciary in the entire country
should emulate this example. In fact, The Supreme Court should even
given a directive to all the courts to allow the people to depose in
the language in which they are familiar with. The interpreters could
be used, though the process may be time consuming and cumbersome.
When the members could speak in the language of their choice in the
Parliament, though they are conversant with Hindi & English, there is
no reason why the litigant public should not be allowed to depose in
the language in which they are familiar. It is certainly unfair to
force them to depose only in the local language of the state or hindi
or in english.
Hats off to justice R P Sondurbaldota for her positive and a
trendsetting approach .
from:
K V Laxmi Prasad
Posted on: Jul 4, 2013 at 22:27 IST
