Petitioner sought recall of an order under Section 311 CrPC to examine witnesses to extend delay from four years after charge-framing. Court dismissed petition as causing injury to accused after long inaction.
Petition under Section 311 CrPC dismissed; order dated 26.07.2012 reaffirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36232 of 2012
====================================================== Gopal Yadav, S/o Shiv Narayan Yadav, R/o Village - Kushi Tole Gajadhar Bigha, P.S. Aurangabad Muffasil, District - Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2 09-05-2013 Heard.
This is a petition for quashing the order dated 26.07.2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrtate-1st Class, Aurangabad in Complaint Case No. 557 of 2000 by which the petition of the petitioner filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recall of the order dated 05.01.2012 as also for examination of his witnesses in the trial has been rejected.
From perusal of the records, it appears that a complaint was filed in the year 2000 for the occurrence which took place with regard to measurement of the land in question. There is allegation that accused persons entered into the house of the complainant and brutally assaulted the complainant and his family members and took away house-hold articles from the house of the complainant. Both the parties are Gotias.
The case proceeded on complaint and charge has been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36232 of 2012 (2) dt.09-05-2013
2
framed on 08.12.2008 against the accused persons. The petitioner having conversant with this fact, examined only one witness in four years after framing of the charge and hence, the case was closed and thereafter complainant has filed a petition under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 01.03.2012 on ground that he was undergoing training at Muzaffarpur and from the certificate issued from Muzaffarpur it was found that the petitioner was undergoing training since 04.11.2011 and hence, sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner to produce witnesses and hence, the petition under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that one more opportunity be given for production of witnesses and recording of evidence.
The allegation made is only a petty offence with regard to dispute between the Gotias in connection with land in question. The matter concerned with family feud. Allegation has been made that the accused persons entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted the complainant and his family members and took away house-hold articles from the house of the complainant. The occurrence is of the year 2000.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36232 of 2012 (2) dt.09-05-2013
3
the charge was framed in the year 2008 and since then several opportunities were given to the petitioner. During the year from 2001 till the close of case the accused has suffered a lot from 2001–2012 i.e. for about 11–12 years and hence, he has sufficiently been punished and the petitioner remained in slumber and did not pursue the case and hence, allowing the petition under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure itself amounts hardship to the accused and an abuse of process of the court and hence, allowing the application is not in the interest of justice.
Hence, I do not feel inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Gopal Prasad, J)
Kundan/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition for examination of witnesses under Section 311 CrPC should be allowed in a delayed case resulting in hardship to the accused.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gopal Yadav
The State of Bihar
Gopal Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
