Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
Amit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State GNCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to summoning order and cross-examination rights. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. conditions for exercising power under section 482 cr. pc. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. dismissal of petition due to lack of diligence. (Para 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 25520/2022 (Exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 6550/2022
1. The present petition has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 9th February, 2017 as well as order dated 2nd June, 2022 whereby the application of the petitioner under Section 311Cr. PC has been dismissed.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not press his challenge to the summoning order dated 9th February, 2017. Learned counsel submits that vide the impugned order dated 2nd June, 2022 his request to recall the complainant for cross examination has been dismissed. It has been submitted that the right of the petitioner to cross examine the complainant was closed vide order dated 16th December, 2021 and thereafter, he moved an application under Section 311 Cr. PC which was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 2nd June, 2022. Learned counsel submits that if he is
The exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires a substantial basis; lack of diligence by the petitioner warranted the dismissal of the petition.
The court's decision emphasized the need to exercise the power under Section 311 Cr.P.C judiciously and to avoid delaying trial proceedings through repeated applications for witness recall.
The right to cross-examine can be forfeited through negligence, and courts may reject applications to recall such rights if the accused fails to act timely.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the plenary power of the court under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code to summon any person at any stage of the proceedings as a witnes....
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 a complainant is essential for a fair trial, and its denial violates principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution.
The doctrine of res judicata applies in criminal proceedings, preventing successive applications for the same relief after a final order.
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
