Dismissed

Rizwan S/O Shri Abdul Rehman v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Jul 2020CRLMP/612/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the trial court's rejection of an application to recall and re-examine the prosecutrix regarding photographs and call details under Section 311 Cr.P.C. The High Court held that the prosecutrix was adequately cross-examined and allowed the petitioner to produce defence evidence, dismissing the petition as an abuse of the court's璋本节功能.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 18-1-2020 rejecting application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. stands upheld.

Rizwan S/O Shri Abdul Rehman Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

[CRLMP-612/2020]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 612/2020

¶5

Rizwan S/o Shri Abdul Rehman, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Kanwarpura, Police Station Deegod, District Kota. (At Present Confined At Central Jail, Kota)

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶9

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hasan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

24/07/2020

¶13

This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 18-11-2020 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases No.3, Kota in Sessions case No.28/2019 vide which application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling the witness PW7 the prosecutrix has been rejected.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the material made available on record.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 CrPC for reexamination of PW-7, prosecutrix regarding photographs and call details, which are essential for the just decision of the case, but the learned trial

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMP-612/2020]

¶18

court has dismissed the application in cursory manner. The petition deserves to be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that no illegality has been committed in passing the impugned order by the trial court. The petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶20

Heard. Considered.

¶21

On bare perusal of the impugned order dated 18-1-2020, it is clear that the prosecutrix has been cross-examined with regard to photographs and call details. The prosecutrix had to appear before the trial court on several dates only for cross-examination. Thus the petitioner has availed more than enough opportunities to cross examine the prosecutrix. He is also at liberty to produce the relevant evidence in his favour in defence evidence. No ground for interference in the impugned order is called for by this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶22

In view of the above, the petition is dismissed.

¶23

(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J

¶24

Arun/82

Rizwan S/O Shri Abdul Rehman v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan S/O Shri Abdul Rehman v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neha Khandelwal D/O Shri Om Prakash Khandelwal, W/O Shri Shivam Vaid B/C Mahajan Vs State of Rajasthan

Bishamber S/O Banwari Lal B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagchand Jain S/O Shri Jeevalal Jain B/C Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand Sharma S/O Late Shri Rameshwar Sharma Vs Satyanarayan Pradhan S/O Late Shri Rameshwar Pradhan B/C Brahmin

Manmohan Singh S/O Shri Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kavita @ Kali W/O Shri Om Prakash D/O Shri Kailash Vs State of Rajasthan