Allowed

Chanpreet Singh v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC22 Nov 2024CRL.REV.P./168/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court allowed a revision petition seeking to reopen cross-examination of a prosecutrix. The petitioner undertook to restrict questions to contradictions in prior statements. The court directed the petitioner to deposit costs for victim counselling and empowered the Trial Court to close cross-examination if irrelevant questions are asked.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed subject to deposit of Rs.10,000 with DSLSA; petitioner undertook to limit cross-examination; Trial Court directed to close cross-examination on irrelevant questions.

Chanpreet Singh Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~28

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.REV.P. 168/2024

¶4

CHANPREET SINGH .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Dr. Kanwal Sapra, Mr. H.R. Dhamija, Mr. Arun Kumar Sapra and Mr. Tapesh Vishnoi, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Yamini Vats PS Patel Nagar, Delhi.

¶8

Mr. Archit Upadhyay, Advocate (DHCLSC) for respondent no.2 with respondent no.2 in person.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R

¶11

% 22.11.2024

¶12

By way of present revision petition, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 18.12.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court vide which the petitioner’s right to further cross-examine the prosecutrix has been closed.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by way of the impugned order, the petitioner’s right to cross-examine the prosecutrix has been closed and therefore, his right to a fair trial has been prejudiced.

¶14

Mr. Archit Upadhyay, Advocate who is on the panel of DHCLSC, is appointed to represent the prosecutrix. He is present in Court alongwith the prosecutrix. Learned APP for the State assisted by Mr. Upadhyay submits that the impugned order came to be passed as the petitioner continued with an irrelevant line of questioning during the cross-examination of the prosecutrix in which he called in question the character of the prosecutrix.

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/11/2024 at 12:06:15

¶16

Mr. Upadhyay, upon instructions, states that the prosecutrix is ready to face cross-examination provided that the same is conducted in accordance with law.

¶17

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that no irrelevant question will be asked on the character of the prosecutrix as well as regarding her personal and social life. He further undertakes that the cross-examination would be restricted only to the alleged contradictions in her previous statements and prays that only one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner for the same.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid, the petition is allowed, subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- upon the petitioner to be deposited with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (A/c No. 18580110053263, UCO Bank, Branch : Rouse Avenue, IFSC : UCBA0003364) within a period of four weeks from today. The amount so deposited shall be utilized by the DSLSA for providing counselling/psychological support to POCSO victims requiring such assistance.

¶19

The Trial Court shall be at liberty to disallow questions in case the same are found irrelevant and also record the questions so asked, and in case irrelevant questions are asked, the Trial Court would also be at liberty to close the cross-examination. The Trial Court shall also ensure that the victim is summoned only for one date and in case she is not cross-examined on that day for any reason, the right of her cross-examination would stand closed.

¶20

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶21

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J

¶22

NOVEMBER 22, 2024/ rd

¶23

Chanpreet Singh v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanpreet Singh v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shashi Bhushan Sharma Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi Administration Vs Hari Chand

Rajan Kashyap Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Dhiresh Narayan @ Munmun Vs State

Government Ofrepublic of Djibouti through H.E.the Ambassador at India Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ss Joshan Vs Tenzing & Anr.