Orders in Katia case reserved till May 5

Meanwhile today, Punjab District Attorney Himmat Singh stated that an agreement for mutual assistance in legal matters had been signed, but was yet to come into force. He added that the matter was still under consideration.

Seeking additional time, he stated that Katia8217;s deposition was essential as she was a material witness and had deposed regarding her molestation before a magistrate, corroborating her earlier statement before the police.The application had been moved as Katia was not deposing before the court due to financial, family and security considerations, he argued.

The Court, in the interest of justice, could suo mottu appoint the commission, even if the application was not maintainable. Her presence could also be procured by issuing arrest war-rants, for which an application had already been moved, he stated.

Opposing the plea for further adjournment, defence counsel stated that the application was non-maintainable under the provisions of law as agreement for examining witnesses was not in existence with France. They added that the commission would not be executed, even if appointed. Moreover, the issuance of a 8220;roving commission8221; had been ruled out by the Supreme Court.

Katia, being a material witness, could be examined only in the court as, under the provisions of law, only the statement of formal witnesses could be recorded by the commission, they argued. An Apex Court authority was also cited to substantiate the contentions.

Arrest warrants could not be issued for procuring Katia8217;s presence either as the Extradition Act was applicable to the accused and not to the witnesses, counsel stated.

Katia was not deposing before the court even though adequate security was promised to her. The State had also agreed to bear the expenditure for her journey, they added.