NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has sounded the alarm on the growing trend of witnesses turning hostile in criminal cases involving the rich and influential, stressing that justice would remain a far cry unless a witness protection mechanism was put in place.

"In cases involving influential people, the common experience is that witnesses do not come forward because of fear and pressure... (it) depicts a tremendous need for witness protection in our country if criminal justice administration has to be a reality," the apex court said.

The blunt acknowledgement of reality came in a recent judgment relating to an 11-year-old incident in Government Girls College at Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, where an influential politician's son crushed a girl under the wheels of his jeep for daring to confront him over his rowdy behaviour.

The arrogant youth's ego was hurt when the girl demanded an explanation for his unruly behaviour and refused to give way. Angered by this, the accused drove the jeep over her and crushed her skull right inside the college. Many friends of the victim witnessed the brutal killing. Not just that. Some of them even tried to catch hold of the assailant and his flunkies.

All of them, however, turned hostile when it came to telling the truth before the trial court.

Upholding the conviction of Samarvijay Singh, who was behind the wheels of the jeep on December 3, 1998, when the incident occurred, a bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat (since retired) and A K Ganguly termed this case a "classic case of deficiency in the criminal justice system to protect witnesses from being threatened by accused".

The bench said it appeared from the record that friends of the victim, her fellow classmates, were eyewitnesses to the incident yet they turned hostile before the trial court, backing out from the statements they had made before the police at the time of investigation.

"The statement made before the police during investigation is no evidence. Unfortunately, in cases involving influential people, the common experience is that witnesses do not come forward because of fear and pressure," the bench said.

Convinced that this case involved exertion of a lot of pressure on witnesses, the bench noticed that one of the victim's friend broke down during cross-examination and blurted out partial facts and requested the trial court not to call her again.

"The plight of the girls who were under pressure depicts the tremendous need for witness protection in our country, if criminal justice administration