Single judge allowed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, setting aside the impugned order and directing the trial Court to recall the witness PW-1 for cross-examination by the petitioner.
The petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Trial Court shall recall PW-1 and permit cross-examination.
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.
1
028criwp825.21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
28 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.825 OF 2021
GEETARAM RAMDS MATE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Gajendra Devichand Jain h/f Mr.Khivansara Sunny S. APP for Respondent-State : Ms. R.P.Gaur
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR , J. DATE : 15th NOVEMBER, 2021.
P. C. :
2
028criwp825.21
the learned APP for the Respondent-State.
ORDER
b. The order impugned is set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) to the District Legal Services, Authority, Aurangabad.
c. Trial Court shall recall PW-1 Dr. Aarti Singh, the Superintendent of Police, Nashik (Rural), District Nashik and shall permit the petitioner/accused to cross-examine her.
( N.R. BORKAR ) JUDGE
mahajansb/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial Court ought to have allowed the applicant to recall the witness PW-1 for cross-examination in the interest of justice.
GEETARAM RAMDS MATE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
N.R. BORKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
