Allowed

Johnson v. M/S.Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance (P) Ltd.

Kerala HC16 Dec 2014Crl.MC/3071/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an order declining recall of the complainant for cross-examination. The Court held that denying cross-examination post-S.313 Cr.P.C. examination requires considering the denial in appeal and authorized a final chance for the accused.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside the request to cross-examine witnesses is quashed; court below directed to grant final opportunity to accused to cross-examine complainant as part of defence evidence.

Johnson Vs M/S.Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance (P) Ltd. — Kerala HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3071 of 2014 ()

¶6

IN CC 360/2013 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I,KOCHI

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

JOHNSON S/O.PAILY, 696, THOPPIL HOUSE AZHEEKKAL.P.O., MURIKKUMPADOM, NJARAKKAL ERNAKULAM-682 510.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1. M/S.SREE GOKULAM CHIT & FINANCE CO.(P) LTD.NO.66 (OLD NO.356) ARCOT ROAD, KODAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 024 REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER.

¶12

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.VIDYASAGAR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE .P

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No. 3071 of 2014 ()

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

ANNEXURE A1- TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF ABSENT APPLICATION AND MEDICAL CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.

¶19

ANNEXURE A2- TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF JFMC-I KOCHI IN CMP NO.2052/14 IN C.C.NO.360/13 DATED 24.5.14.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE sab

P.UBAID, J.

-----------------------------

¶25

Crl. M.C No. 3071 of 2014

¶26

---------------------------------------

¶27

Dated this the 16^th day of December, 2014.

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C No.360/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- I, Kochi. The case has now crossed the stage of examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. As the learned counsel for the accused could not cross examine the complainant at the right stage, he made application to recall the complainant for cross examination, after the examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The said application brought as C.M.P 2052/14 was dismissed by the learned Magistrate, on the ground that the accused had availed so many opportunities earlier to cross examine the witness. The said order is under challenge in this proceeding. On hearing both sides I find that an opportunity can be granted as a final chance to the accused to cross examine the complainant. If the complainant is not cross examined, and ultimately the case ends in conviction, denial of right to cross examine the complainant will have to be considered in appeal. To avoid another round of litigation, the accused can be permitted to cross examine the complainant. I do not think that

¶30

Crl. M.C No. 3071 of 2014 2

¶31

any prejudice will be caused to the complainant, if he is cross examined, because it is the right of the accused to cross examine the complainant during trial. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was seriously ill, and that is why he could not give necessary instructions to the counsel at the right stage. Anyway, on a consideration of all the circumstances, I find that a final opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to cross examine the complainant.

¶32

In the result, this petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the court below declining the request to cross examine the witnesses is set aside, and the court below is directed to grant a final opportunity to the accused to cross examine the complainant by way of defence evidence. The parties will appear in the court below on 12.01.2015.

¶33

P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶34

sab

Johnson v. M/S.Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Johnson v. M/S.Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance (P) Ltd.

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

A.T.Nazar Vs State of Kerala

Karimala Granites & Aggregates Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

K.M.Nasarudheen Vs State of Kerala

Ameer Abdul Azeez Vs Sub Inspector of Police Kayamkulam

David Laly Vs State of Kerala