A single judge quashed an order declining the applicant's prayer under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to cross-examine a witness, directing the trial court to afford him one opportunity to do so.
Trials court to provide one opportunity to the accused-applicant to cross-examine the witness.
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. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24256 of 2019
Applicant :- Akash Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manjeet Kumar,D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 17.5.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Moradabad in S.T. No. 368 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 132 of 2018 (State Vs. Akash), u/s 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Thakurdwara, District Moradabad pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Moradabad by which prayer for recalling the witness PW-1 for cross-examination has been refused.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. praying that he may be permitted to cross-examine PW-1 Tej Pal Singh but the same has been dismissed by the trial court closing the opportunity to cross-examine the said witness because the learned counsel for the accused-applicant could not appear before the trial court till 4:30 pm.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for quashing.
I have gone through the said impugned order in which it has been recorded that no justifiable reason has been given for not appearing to cross-examine the witness, hence the said application was dismissed. I deem it appropriate that one opportunity ought to be granted to the learned counsel for the accused-applicant to cross-examine the said witness. Since this is an innocuous order only granting opportunity to the accusedapplicant to cross-examine the said witness, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is being disposed of without giving opportunity to the opposite party no. 2. In case he feels aggrieved by this order, he may approach this Court.
In view of above, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of with the direction that the trial court shall provide one opportunity to the accused-applicant to cross-examine the
said witness and in case on the said appointed date by the trial court, the accused/his counsel does not appear to cross-examine the said witness, no further opportunity shall be provided.
Order Date :- 1.7.2019 A.P. Pandey
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the application to recall a witness for cross-examination due to the applicant's delay in appearance.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Akash Kumar
State Of Up
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
