Petitioner challenging an order closing cross-examination of a prosecutrix. Held, counsel absence not a good ground for adjournment per Section 309 CrPC when witness present, especially in rape cases. Petition dismissed.
Criminal Misc. Petition dismissed; stay application disposed of.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5679/2019
Mahendra Malav S/o Dhanraj B/c Malav, R/o J-375, Ipia Bhamashah Mandi Road No.6, Ps Anantpura, Kota.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Tyagi For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.G. Chopra, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Order
22/10/2019
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-5679/2019]
prosecutrix but on account of being busy, he did not turn up before the Court.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
Simple Kumawat /118
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the accused was entitled to an adjournment when his counsel was absent despite the witness being present in court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mahendra Malav
State Of Rajasthan
Pankaj Bhandari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
