High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a trial court order rejecting a Section 311 Cr.P.C. motion for re-examination of a witness, finding no illegality or lack of opportunity.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed; the impugned order under Section 311 Cr.P.C. stands unreversed.
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. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18532 of 2022
Applicant :- Jain Lodhi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mahboob Ahmad,Anas Mahboob,Irfan Alim Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
By means of this application, applicant has prayed for quashing of the order dated 25.05.2022 passed by learned Addl. District and Session Judge in Case Crime No. 0437 of 2020, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Aligarh whereby the application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to re-examine PW-2, has been rejected by the court below.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that some important questions could not be asked and therefore it was the duty of the court to allow the application and to permit the re-examination of PW-2.
To the contrary, learned A.G.A. submitted submitted that the accused had already been given opportunity to cross-examine the witness, therefore, the accused had all the opportunity to cross-examine the witness on all the points. Accordingly, this application has rightly been rejected by the trial court on valid reasons.
I have gone through the impugned order and found that the conclusions noted by the trial Court, while deciding the application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C., are appropriate and just. I do not find any bonafides in the application of the applicant, while seeking the permission of the Court under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for re-examination of P.W.-2 only on the ground that some important questions have been left to be asked. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that there is no illegality in the rejection of application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. The court is only to ensure that accused has been afforded a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and to defend himself. It is also the duty of the court to ensure that the right to cross-examination should not be permitted to be used as a weapon to delay the disposal of the trial at the mercy of the accused person.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits, and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.2.2023 RavindraKSingh
Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court committed an error in rejecting the Section 311 Cr.P.C. application for re-examination of PW-2.
Whether the applicant has bonafides to seek additional cross-examination questions fora Section 482 Cr.P.C. application.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Jain Lodhi
State Of U.P.
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Ravindra Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
