The High Court disposed of a criminal revision filed by the CBI against the rejection of an application to cross-examine a witness under Section 311 Cr.P.C., directing the trial court to permit cross-examination on specific relevant questions.
Cross-examination of PW-14 permitted on questions no.3, A & B of no.5, and B of no.9.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| CRLR No.51 of 2021 Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Mahavir Kohli, learned counsel for the revisionist. Mr. Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel for the CBI. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 25.02.2021 passed by Special Judge, Anticorruption, CBI/1stAddl. Session Judge, Dehradun, in CBI Case No.1 of 2017, CBI vs. Surrendra Kumar Gupta. From the perusal of the record, a CBI Case No.1 of 2017, CBI vs. Surrendra Kumar Gupta, is pending before the Special Judge, CBI, Dehradun in which an application was submitted on behalf of the accused under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for putting some questions before the PW-14. The concerned Court after hearing both the parties rejected the application by the impugned order. Aggrieved by it, the present revision is preferred. During the course of hearing on 16.03.2021, the copy of the questioners also submitted to the learned counsel for the CBI. From the perusal of the questioners, it is clear that the question no.3, question no.A and B of question no.5 and question no.B of question no.9 are relevant while the other questions are irrelevant. The learned counsel for the CBI submitted that the matter has already been fixed for recording the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., if the court thinks proper only one opportunity can be given to the learned counsel for the accused for putting the above questions. |
| The learned Sr. counsel for the revisionist fairly submitted that, he will not take any further adjournment before the trial court. Accordingly, the instant revision is liable to be disposed of; thus the revision is disposed of and the learned counsel for the accused will have a right to cross-examine with PW-14 in |
|---|
| light of the above questions particularly in question no.3, question no. A and B of question no.5 and question no.B of question no.9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. |
| (R.C. Khulbe, J.) 15.11.2021 BS |
CBI
Surrendra Kumar Gupta
R.C. Khulbe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
