IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
Saket Sharma, S/o Shri Hiramani Sharma - Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Mahila Police Station AJAK and ors.- Respondents
CRMP No. 298 of 2024
Decided On : 20-03-2024
The court rejected the petitioner's application for re-examination of the victim under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C., stating that the victim's previous testimony was sufficient and that recalling witnesses to deny previous evidence is impermissible. The court held that recalling witnesses to deny previous evidence is impermissible and that the victim's subsequent statements cannot be allowed to contradict her previous testimony. The court dismissed the petition, stating that the victim's previous testimony was sufficient and that recalling witnesses to deny previous evidence is impermissible.
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 24.11.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities Act) North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) in Special Session Case No. 07/2019 by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
2. The petitioner is facing trial under Sections 376. 294, 354, 450 of IPC read with Section 3 (2) (v) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 67 (A) of Information Technology Act. After framing of charge, the witnesses have been summoned and the prosecutrix has been examined. The prosecutrix was examined before the learned Special Judge wherein she has stated that she is known to the accused as she was also posted as clerk in the Collectorate Branch, Kanker. Thereafter, they developed friendship and the accused used to say that he loves her and wants to marry her. The petitioner has provided rent accommodation of the house where he was also residing in the month of April, 2015 and thereafter started staying at night in the room of the victim and made an attempt to have physical relationship with her which was objected by the prosecutrix. She has also stated that she is not agreeable to marry with the petitioner as both belong to different castes and still he used to say that despite different caste, he is ready to marry her and thereafter alluring her, he has forcefully made physical relationship with her and started living in the room and continuously making relationship with her. She has also stated that when the accused was transferred to Jabalpur region he used to send ticket to her to visit Jabalpur and thereafter he has made physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. It has also been stated by her that in the year 2016, the marriage of the accused was fixed with some other girl, as such, he started maintaining distance with the prosecutrix and when she visited to his house at Jabalpur, he has not allowed her to enter into his home. When she insisted him for marriage, he has abused her. Therefore, she has lodged the complaint. The prosecutrix was extensively cross-examined by the defence counsel before the trial Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed WPCR No. 200/2019 before this Court wherein, this Court has passed the following order:-
Without any further observations on merits of the case, it is observed that the parties may record their statements before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) on 20.06.2022.
Subsequently, the merit of the case with respect of compounding the offence shall be considered at a latter state.”
4. The said WPCR has been dismissed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 18.03.2023, the operative part of the order is reproduce of below:-
Mishrilal & others Vs. State of M.P. & others
The discretionary power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. should be exercised to recall a witness when such examination is essential for reaching a just decision, and an application should not be rejected so....
The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously and for strong and valid reasons, ensuring a fair trial and the just decision of the case.
Criminal Revision - Though there are no limits of the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Code but the more the power, the more due care and caution is to be exercised in invoking these powe....
The power under Section 311, Cr.P.C. should be exercised with restraint and caution, especially at the final stage of the trial, and delay in filing the application may impact the court's decision.
The court held that the accused has a right to cross-examine the victim, but restrictions apply to protect minors, emphasizing the need for relevance and care in questioning under the provisions of S....
The court reaffirmed that recall and re-examination of witnesses under Section 311 CrPC should only occur when essential for justice, particularly rejecting unnecessary processes that may lead to an ....
The court determines that the discretionary power under Section 311 CrPC for summoning witnesses must be exercised judiciously; prior inconsistent evidence negates the necessity for re-examination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for strong and valid reasons to recall witnesses, the protection of child victims from repeated testimony, and the discretion of the court....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.