Another Witness Silenced in Delhi, Raising Alarm on Protection System
The initial findings in the murder investigation of Rachna Yadav point to a chilling motive: she was likely eliminated because she was a witness to her husband's murder. The primary suspicion, according to the police probe, falls on Bharat Yadav, a suspect in her husband's case who remains at large. If confirmed, this would mark yet another case of witness killing in the national capital, exposing deep vulnerabilities in the safety apparatus for those who testify.
A Disturbing Pattern of Intimidation and Murder
This incident is not isolated. Over the past year, at least four similar witness killings have been reported in Delhi, casting serious doubt on the effectiveness of existing witness protection frameworks. The murder of Rachna Yadav underscores an urgent need for authorities to proactively identify vulnerable witnesses and extend protection to them without waiting for a formal request (suo motu).
While Delhi has its own witness protection guidelines, operational since last year, and the central government issued a notification in 2018, their implementation leaves much to be desired, a retired police officer noted. "While actual witness murders may be few, witnesses are frequently threatened and pressured not to depose in court. If such complaints are addressed firmly at the initial stage, it might prevent the situation from escalating to murder," he explained.
Sources indicate that due to the high volume of such complaints and limited resources, police often cannot treat every threat as a top-priority case, creating dangerous loopholes.
Global Models and Delhi's Current Measures
Internationally, witness protection programmes are far more comprehensive. They often include a suite of security upgrades for witnesses' homes, such as reinforced doors, CCTV cameras, alarms, and fencing. In cases of grave danger, witnesses and their families are relocated to safe locations.
The United States Marshals Service runs a renowned witness security programme that provides protection, new identities, and even new social security numbers to witnesses and their kin. This programme has been crucial in securing convictions in high-profile organised crime and terrorism cases. An officer familiar with such models stated, "A personalised protection plan is developed for each witness, considering their specific needs, circumstances, and risk level. Witnesses are also given secure communication methods to prevent interception by potential threats."
Similarly, Italy's programme has been instrumental in fighting the mafia, and Australia runs a national witness security programme.
In Delhi, police officials stated they employ various measures, from using codewords for witnesses in chargesheets of sensitive cases to providing security cover. Delhi Police has a dedicated witness protection cell at the district level, headed by an officer of the Additional DCP rank, which functions based on threat analysis reports. "A standing committee, chaired by a district and sessions judge, acts as the competent authority to decide on witness protection applications," an officer clarified.
The Path Forward: From Reactive to Proactive
The recurring tragedy of witness killings signals a system in crisis. Experts argue that merely having guidelines is insufficient; robust implementation, adequate funding, and a shift from a reactive to a proactive stance are critical. Identifying witnesses at high risk early on and deploying a graded system of protection—inspired by global best practices but tailored to local constraints—could be a vital step forward. The murder of Rachna Yadav is a grim reminder that the scales of justice cannot balance if those who bear witness are not safe to speak the truth.
