Single judge quashed an order rejecting an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall a prosecution witness, directing the lower court to recall the witness and fix associated expenses within one month.
Set aside order rejecting application under S. 311 Cr.P.C.; direct lower court to recall PW-1 and fix date and expenses.
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. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10006 of 2019
Applicant :- Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Saran,Rohan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel on behalf of applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed for quashing/set aside the order dated 08.01.2019 in S.T. No. 84/17 (State Vs Saroj and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 28/2017, under section 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Arniya, District Bulandshahar whereby which the Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Bulandshahar has passed an order, rejecting the application moved at the behest of applicant (U/s 311 Cr.P.C.) to recall P.W.-1 (First Informant/Complainant).
The contention of learned counsel on behalf of applicant is that the court concerned has arbitrarily and in a mechanically manner has rejected the application moved at the behest of applicant to recall PW-1/First Informant namely Manoj Kumar. It is further contended that not only Smt. Snehlata/PW-2 but also Vinod Kumar, who is projected as PW-3 also demolished the version of prosecution in his testimony, thereby raising a huge doubt upon the entire prosecution version after the said improvements took place in the trial, the applicant after some legal assistance realized that certain material questions are still unanswered.
Learned AGA states that after through examination of the application moved on behalf of the applicant under section 311 Cr.P.C., the same was rejected by the concerned court below, which suffers from no legality or infirmity and no interference is required in the order impugned.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the order impugned this court is of the opinion that the judgment dated 08.01.2019 in S.T. No. 84/17 (State Vs Saroj and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 28/2017, under section 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Arniya, District Bulandshahar whereby which the Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Bulandshahar has passed
an order, rejecting the application moved at the behest of applicant (U/s 311 Cr.P.C.) to recall P.W.-1 (First Informant/Complainant) is hereby set aside and the concerned court below is directed to afford an opportunity to the applicant for recalling the PW-1 on the expenses which shall be paid over by the applicant by fixing a date for re-examining the PW-1.
In case the applicant could not avail the opportunity on the date fixed by the concerned court below, no further opportunity will be granted to the applicant.
The aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of one month from today.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall file an appropriate application alongwith certified copy of this order before the concerned court below within a period of 15 days from today and to bear all the expenses whatsoever, required in recalling the witness.
The lower court is at liberty to fix the expenses.
With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 25.3.2019 Arti
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order rejecting the application to recall the first informant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was arbitrary and required quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether the applicant should be afforded an opportunity to recall the prosecution witness PW-1.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Saroj
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
