Madan Lal Regar Son of Chhotu Verma, Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Madan Lal Regar Son of Chhotu Verma, Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the learned Trial Court to allow one more opportunity to the accused-petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/witness; the accused-petitioner along with his counsel to appear before the Trial Court on 27.02.2025, whereupon the Trial Court shall fix the date for the cross-examination; stay and pending applications stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioner may be granted one more opportunity to cross-examine the complainant/witness after the Trial Court dismissed his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and the Revisional Court made the same observations. +1 more

Court's answer

On consideration of the submissions and perusal of the record, the Court found that the statement of the complainant/witness was recorded on 15.06.2024 and, thereafter, on 06.07.2024 the opportunity of cross-examination of the complainant was closed.

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances, and more particularly that the opportunity to cross-examine had been closed in a short period of about 20 days, the Court deemed it just and proper, in the interest of justice, to exercise the inherent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

The miscellaneous petition is disposed of with the direction to the learned Trial Court to allow one more opportunity to the accused-petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/witness.ratio¶22
The accused-petitioner along with his counsel shall appear before the learned Trial Court on 27.02.2025, and the Trial Court shall fix the date for allowing him an opportunity to cross-examine the complainant/witness.ratio¶23
Since the main petition is disposed of, the stay application and pending application/s, if any, also stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal miscellaneous petition by the accused seeking one more opportunity to cross-examine the complainant/witness. The complainant's evidence had been recorded on 15.06.2024 and the opportunity to cross-examine was closed on 06.07.2024, when counsel for the accused (who had moved an exemption application for personal appearance that day) did not turn up to cross-examine up till 04.30 P.M. The Trial Court dismissed the accused's application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 31.07.2024, observing that the matter was an old one, and the learned Revisional Court made the same observations. Holding that the opportunity to cross-examine had been closed within a short period of about 20 days, the High Court deemed it just and proper, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent jurisdiction. The petition was disposed of with a direction to the Trial Court to allow one more opportunity to the accused-petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/witness; the accused-petitioner and his counsel were directed to appear before the Trial Court on 27.02.2025, and the stay and pending applications stood disposed of.

[2025:RJ-JP:7349]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1042/2025

Madan Lal Regar Son Of Chhotu Verma, Regran Mohalla, Village Malipura, Post Pasrotiya Malipura, District Tonk (Raj).

----Accused/Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

S.r. Finance, Proprietor Vinay Vaid Son Of Ratan Lal Baid, Office G-1, Pink Tower, Near Rajasthan Hospital, Behind Sahara Chamber, Tonk Fatak, Jaipur.

----Complainant/Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Bairwa For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Yadav, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order

19/02/2025

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the petitioner may be granted one opportunity to cross-examine the complainant/witness. Counsel further submits that the evidence of the complainant was recorded on 15.06.2024 and, thereafter, on 06.07.2024, opportunity to cross-examine the

witness/complainant was closed. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has not been afforded appropriate opportunity to crossexamine the complainant/witness.

After considering the submissions and perusal of the material made available on record, the learned Trial Court dismissed the application vide its order dated 31.07.2024, filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C., observing that on 06.07.2024, though an application for exemption of the personal appearance for that date was moved on behalf of the accused-petitioner and counsel

[CRLMP-1042/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:7349]

(2 of 2)

for the accused did not turn up to cross-examine the complainant/witness up till 04.30 P.M. and the evidence was closed and the matter being an old matter, he cannot be allowed the opportunity to cross-examine.

Learned Revisional Court also observed the same thing. 4. On consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and also on perusal of the record, this Court finds that the statement of complainant/witness was recorded on 15.06.2024 and, thereafter, on 06.07.2024 the opportunity of cross-examination of complainant was closed.

Taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that the opportunity to cross-examine has been closed in short period of about 20 days. This Court in the interest of justice deems just and proper to exercise the inherent jurisdiction.

Accordingly, this misc. petition is disposed of with the direction to the learned Trial Court to allow one more opportunity to the accused-petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/witness.

The accused-petitioner along with his counsel shall appear before the learned Trial Court on 27.02.2025 and the learned Trial Court shall fix the date for allowing him an opportunity to crossexamine the complainant/witness.

Since the main petition is disposed of, the stay application & pending application/s, if any, also stand disposed of.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

SAURABH /77