K.v.Pownraj, Aged 47 Years, v. State Rep. by
Case brief
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :…
What did the court decide?
The order of the court below dated 20.02.2018 was set aside; petitioner was directed to examine 56 specific witnesses afresh.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.12.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Crl.O.P.No.7076 of 2018
and Crl.M.P.No.3655 of 2018
K.V.Pownraj ...Petitioner/6th Accused
Vs.
State rep. By The Inspector of Police, EOW II Unit, Erode, Erode District. Crime No.5/2012. ...Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 20.02.2018 made in Memo dated 05.10.2017 filed in C.C.No. 20 of 2012 on the file of the learned Special Judge,TNPID ACT cases, Coimbatore set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manokaran
For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor
This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Court below in dismissing the Memo filed by the petitioner seeking for afresh de-novo trial.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the provisions of Section 319(4) Cr.P.C. mandate a de-novo trial with fresh examination of witnesses for a newly added accused.
Whether the lower court erred in rejecting the petitioner's plea for re-examination of prosecution witnesses instead of permitting only cross-examination.
Whether the High Court can interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to ensure the statutory right to a de-novo trial is enforced.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.V. Pownraj
- respondent
State rep. By The Inspector of Police, EOW II Unit, Erode
Coram
N. Anand Venkatesh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court