Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging rejection of Section 311 Cr.P.C. prayer was dismissed. Court held application lacked merit as applicant had refused to tender evidence when prosecution evidence was closed.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 42
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23372 of 2018
Applicant :- Buddhu @ Buddhu Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.C.Srivastava,Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
By way of the instant application, challenge has been made to the order dated 04.07.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Baghpat, in Session Trial No.209 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.54 of 2013 under Sections 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Badaut, District Baghpat whereby the application 33B moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Contention is that in this case, defence of the applicant shall be prejudiced if he is not allowed to tender evidence before the trial court. It has also been submitted that at least one last chance may be given to the applicant to produce his testimony so that he may put his defence.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer and has given various reasons in support of the impugned order annexed as annexure no.2 to the affidavit filed in support of this application.
Considered the submissions and perused the contents of the document brought before this Court and particularly the impugned order dated 04.07.2018 wherein authenticity of the document which was tried to be placed on record belatedly was considered to be irrelevant and unconcerned with adjudication of the merits of the present case, consequently, the same was found redundant for the purpose of adjudication of the trial.
It is further apparent that in this case, final
arguments were completed on 02.04.2018, whereas, the applicant flared remour that he is going to be acquitted of charge, therefore, the informant/prosecutrix moved transfer application for transfer of this case (Session Trial No.209 of 2013). That way, things have been delayed. However, after failure of the aforesaid attempt, application 33B under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved at the stage when the evidence for the prosecution was closed on 30.03.2018 on account of clear refusal of the defence itself that he does not wish to tender any evidence.
In view of above, it cannot be said that the order impugned in the instant application is erroneous, perverse and against spirit of justice and tenets of fair trial. Therefore, the instant application being devoid of merit is dismissed.
The observation made in this order shall not be construed to have any reflection on merits of the case.
Order Date :- 20.8.2018
rkg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an applicant is entitled to a last chance to tender evidence before the trial court after final arguments concluded.
Whether the rejection of an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is a fit case for the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Buddhu @ Buddhu Prakash
State Of U.P.
Another
Arvind Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
