Disposed

Bhabani Pandey v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC9 Dec 2016CRLMC/3697/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim appeal against an order quashing requests under Section 311 CrPC to recall a witness and summon an IIC, the High Court held the plea to recall the prosecution witness rightly rejected as presented defectively. The plea to summon the IIC was not permissible then. Parties directed to file a proper application.

What did the court decide?

Grant of opportunity to file a properly constituted application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. denying quashing of the impugned order regarding recall of P.W.21.

CRLMC No.3697 of 2016 09.12.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Standing Counsel. The petitioners being the accused in C.T. Case No.124/46/29 of 2010-13, pendin g in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bargarh have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the order passed by the said Court on 31.10.2016. In the petition under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed to recall P.W.21, i .e. I.O. of the case for further cross-examination and to summon the then Inspector In-charge, Sadar Police Station Bargarh for his examination. Both the prayers have been rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. However, it is borne out from the records that as far as recalli ng P.W.21, the learned Judge has rejected on the ground mainly that no questionnaire has been annexed to petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and the averments made therein in the petition u nder Section 311 Cr.P.C. do not reflect exact reasons for the petition accused wants to recall the P.W.21.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that application has rightly been rejected. This Court gives an opportunity to the petitioners to file a properly c onstituted application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. delineating the questions to be put such witn ess, i.e. P.W.21 on recall. On such event, the petition shall be considered by the learned Jud ge after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the prosecution an d the same shall be disposed of without being influenced of the order passed by him on 31.10.2 016.

As far as second prayer is concerned, the petitioners have sought to summon wh ether the Police Officer, who was then to IIC, Sadar Police Station. The said person has not a charge-sheeted witness. He has not examined on behalf the prosecution. Recalling such witness is not permissible at this stage. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file an applicat ion for summoning I.I.C. Bargarh when the petitioners enter into their defence after their exa mination under

Bhabani Pandey v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhabani Pandey v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Duryodhan@Hadu Meher Vs State of Orissa

Dibakar Behera Vs State of Orissa

Aurobinda@Arabinda Dhal Vs State of Orissa

Bikasmita Giri Vs State of Orissacrime Branch

Nirupama Choudhury Vs State of Orissa

Nirbani Sahu Vs State of Orissa