Witness Identity Protection - Law Commission of India

48(Q) 3. Can the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 16 of the Terroristand Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 or section 30 of thePrevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, which permit the Court to pass anorder; -avoiding the mentioning of the names and addresses of the witnesses inits orders or judgments or in any records of the cases accessible topublic,issuing directions for securing that the identity and addresses of thewitnesses are not disclosed, or;direct that, in public interest, the proceedings pending before the Courtbe not published in any manner, -be made applicable to cases involving other grave offences where theCourt is satisfied that there is material which prima facie shows dangerto the life of the witness or to his relations or to their property?Section 16 of the TADA, 1987 and section 30 of the POTA, 2002permit the Court to pass an order for maintaining anonymity of witnessesand also for prohibiting publication of proceedings of the Court. Thoughboth these enactments have been repealed, similar provisions have beenbrought into the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 as section 44vide amendments made in the year 2004.Now question is whether similar provisions have to be madeapplicable in respect of cases involving grave offences, where even it isnecessary to do so?In all the responses (except one), it was opined that provisions similarto TADA 1987 & POTA, 2002, should also be made applicable in respect ofcases involving grave offences, where there is danger to the life or propertyof witness or his relatives. However, DIG Police H.Q. Madhya Pradesh is