Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Ravi Shanker – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 6018 of 2022 & Cr.M.A. 23605 of 2022 (stay)
Decided On : 13-03-2023
Recalling of Witnesses - Cross-Examination - Opportunity granted for cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-10
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the rejection of the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling PW-1 and PW-10 for cross-examination.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted the petitioner an opportunity for the cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-10, considering the consent of the prosecutrix for the cross-examination.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner should be allowed to recall PW-1 and PW-10 for cross-examination regarding certain relevant aspects.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the consent of the prosecutrix for the cross-examination and the interest of justice.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and disposed of the pending application, granting the petitioner an opportunity for the cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-10.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--Present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 28.09.2022, whereby, the application of the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling of PW-1 and PW-10 for cross examination was rejected by the learned Trial Court. It is pertinent to note that in the present case, PW-1 is the prosecutrix and PW-10 is the Investigating Officer.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that inadvertently PW-1 and PW-10 were left out to be cross-examined regarding certain relevant aspects, i.e., site plan of the incident, statement of the victim's friend, seizure of mobile phone etc. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that PW-1 and PW-10 shall be cross-examined only to this extent and the petitioner shall not take any adjournment for the cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-10.
3. PW-1 is appearing through video conferencing. Her counsel Sh. Lalit Sharma is present in Court. It has been stated that she has no objection if the present petition is allowed. An affidavit confirming this has also been handed over in Court.
4. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State has opposed the present petition. It has been submitted that the learned Trial Court has passed a detailed and reasoned order and there is no reason to set aside the same.
5. Without going into the merits of the case and in view of the fact that the prosecutrix herself has consented for the cross-examination, I consider that the petitioner can be given an opportunity for the cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-10.
6. It has been informed that the matter is fixed before the learned Trial Court for 17.03.2023.
7. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, let PW-1 and PW-10 be recalled for their cross-examination only to the extent of site plan of the incident, statement of the victim's friend, seizure of mobile phone etc.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the pending application stands disposed of.
9. It is made clear that this court has not gone into the merits of the case and any expression made herein shall not tantamount to be an expression on merits of the case.
The consent of the prosecutrix for cross-examination and the interest of justice influenced the court's decision to grant the petitioner an opportunity for cross-examination of witnesses.
The main legal point established is the judicious exercise of discretionary power under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. to ensure the just decision of the case, considering the essentiality of evidence an....
The court emphasizes the right to cross-examine key witnesses to uphold fair trial principles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the essentiality of evidence for the just decision of the case and the wide discretionary powers of the court under Section 311 Cr.P.C.
Power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised only when it is essential for just decision of case.
The court established that Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. allows for re-examination of witnesses when essential for a just decision, emphasizing the importance of thorough cross-examination.
The court upheld the dismissal of a petition for recalling a witness for cross-examination due to lack of concrete reasons and previous ample opportunities for cross-examination.
The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental to a fair trial, and courts must allow re-examination if essential for justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
