Dismissed

Nishi Kant v. The Union Of India Through C B I

Jharkhand HC14 Dec 2017Cr.Rev./1701/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand in Criminal Revision No. 1701 of 2017 dismissed the petitioner's revision against the Additional Sessions Judge's order rejecting a Section 311 Cr.P.C. application for recalling a non-charge-sheet witness. The court held that since the witness was formal and the defence counsel had previously refused to cross-examine the present witness despite the opportunity.

What did the court decide?

The revision application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed as there was no merit in the same.

Nishi Kant Vs The Union Of India Through C B I — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Criminal Revision No. 1701 of 2017

¶3

Nishi Kant .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party --CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the CBI : Mr. K. P. Deo, Advocate ---

¶4

Order No. 03 Dated 14 th December, 2017

¶5

Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.P. Deo, learned counsel for the CBI.

¶6

This application is directed against the order dated 08.11.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum- Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad in R.C. Case No. 12(A)/10-D, by which the application filed u/s 311 Cr.P.C. on behalf of defence has been rejected.

¶7

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the representation application u/s 317 Cr.P.C. was allowed and on the same day non charge-sheet witness was produced and therefore the defence counsel in absence of the petitioner was not in a position to cross examine P.W. 12. Learned counsel further submits that one opportunity be given to the defence to cross examine P.W. 12.

¶8

Mr. K. P. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the CBI has opposed the prayer of the petitioner.

¶9

It appears that the petitioner is a formal witness who has merely proved her writing and signature on the formal F.I.R. and the complaint petition. P.W. 12 was produced by the prosecution, but the defence counsel had refused to cross-examine the witness in absence of the petitioner.

¶10

On consideration of the fact that the witness sought to be examined is formal in nature and the fact that the defence had an opportunity to cross examine the said witness which was refused by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned trial court has rightly rejected the application filed on behalf of defence u/s 311 Cr.P.C.

¶11

There being no merit in this application, the same is hereby dismissed.

¶12

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

¶13

Nishi Kant v. The Union Of India Through C B I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishi Kant v. The Union Of India Through C B I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gudda Rai and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Dipak Kumar Bhagat Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Pallab Kumar Roy Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rajesh Alias Durga Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Arvind Kumar Das Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Sakaldeo Munda Vs The State Of Jharkhand