Impermissible for trial courts to record testimony only in English if witness gives evidence in vernacular: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its disapproval of the practice adopted by some trial courts to record depositions of witnesses only in English, as translated by the judge, even when the witness testifies in a different language [Naim Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi)]..A Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi was of the view that the evidence of the witness has to be recorded in their language, as may be practicable, after which it should be translated into the language of the court for forming part of the record."... recording of evidence of the witness in the translated form in English language only, though the witness gives evidence in the language of the court, or in his/her own vernacular language, is not permissible," the Court said..The Court added that the original deposition of the witness, in the language in which it was given, would give better insight into what was said."As such, the text and tenor of the evidence and the demeanor of a witness in the court could be appreciated in the best manner only when the evidence is recorded in the language of the witness. Even otherwise, when a question arises as to what exactly the witness had stated in his/her evidence, it is the original deposition of the witness which has to be taken into account and not the translated memorandum in English prepared by the Presiding Judge," the Court explained..The Court made these observations while disposing of an appeal preferred by the accused in a rape case that involved allegations of false promise to marry.It acquitted the appellant after noting that each and every breach of promise to marry would not amount to a false promise or, consequentially, "rape" as per Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..Not necessary that every breach of promise to marry is false promise: Supreme Court acquits rape convict.In its judgment, the Court also noticed that the deposition of the prosecutrix in this case was recorded by the trial court in English even though she had deposed in her vernacular language.The Bench went on to take critical note that this practice is followed in other criminal trials as well, i.e. where depositions or testimonies of the witnesses which are given in the vernacular language are recorded in the English language only, as translated by the judge..This prompted the Court to highlight that trial courts should comply with the provisions of Section 277 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (CrPC), while recording the testimony of the witnesses. Section 277 deals with the language in which evidence should be recorded in criminal trials. The said provision provides 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." The provision adds that if it is not practicable to record such evidence in the language in which it is given by the witness, then a "a true translation" shall be prepared in the language of the court. The Supreme Court further noted that as per this provision,"It is only when the witness gives evidence in English and is taken down as such, and a translation thereof in the language of the court is not required by any of the parties, then the court may dispense with such translation.".As such, the Court directed trial courts to duly comply with the provisions of Section 277 CrPC while recording the evidence of witnesses..[Read Judgment]