Manoj Ku.Mahato v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
A judicial review petition challenging an order denying a second chance to cross-examine witnesses and examine defence witnesses in a criminal trial was dismissed by this court, finding no illegality.
What did the court decide?
The criminal review petition structure is dismissed without interference in the impugned order.
What the court decided
CRLMC No.2352 1 of 2010
- 20.06.2019 None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite issuance of notice to engage counsel.
- Heard learned Addl. Government Advocate.
In this case the order dtd.06.08.2010 passed in S.T. No.6/7 of 2009 of the court of ACJM-ASJ, Rourkela is sought to be quashed on the ground P.W.8 was to be cross-examined at the stage of defence and witnesses Pinku, Priyanka and Khediza were to be examined as defence witnesses.
Learned Trial Court held that evidence of those three witnesses are not required for just decision of the case and P.W.8 was already cross-examined by the defence at the stage of prosecution evidence.
Having gone through the order impugned and after hearing learned Addl. Government Advocate it appears that the order impugned does not suffer from any illegality as such no interference is called for.
Accordingly the CRLMC stands dismissed.
………………………... Dr. A. K. Mishra, J.
mkp
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order in S.T. No.6/7 of 2009 directing quashing of witnesses summons suffers from any illegality.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
None
- respondent
Addl. Government Advocate
Coram
Dr. A. K. Mishra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court