Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
K. Angajan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
Order dated 05.10.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.619/2014 in S.C.No.101/2023 pending before the Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short 'POCSO Act' hereinafter), Thalassery is put under challenge by the accused in this Crl.M.C. filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail.
3. Precisely, in this case, the petitioner who alleged to have committed offences punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 10 read with Section 9(l), (m)and (n) of POCSO Act was tried by the trial court. PW1 to PW13 were examined. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.619/2014 in S.C.No.101/2023 and the copy of the same is Annexure AVI, wherein it is contended that at the time of cross examination of PW1/Victim, the counsel for the petitioner/accused was given instruction that the case was settled.
But during chief-examination, the victim gave evidence in support of the prosecution case. It is contended that as no instructions were given to cross examine the victim, since the case was compromised, the counsel for the pet
The court upheld the trial court's decision to deny the recall of a child witness, emphasizing the need for effective prior cross-examination and adherence to statutory restrictions under the POCSO A....
The court affirmed that recall of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must serve a valid purpose and the previous opportunities for cross-examination were adequate, aligning with the protective manda....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 311 of Cr.P.C and the dilution of rigor under Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act once the victim crosses the age of 18....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretion of the court in permitting the recall of witnesses, particularly in cases involving child witnesses, and the importance of balancing....
The essential right of the accused to cross-examine prosecution witnesses is crucial for a fair trial and should not be denied, even when balancing the rights of child victims under the POCSO Act.
A court may refuse to recall a witness for cross-examination if the application is made after significant delays, particularly under special legislation designed to protect vulnerable witnesses of ch....
Recall of witnesses – It is mandatory for a Court to recall witness for further cross-examination if his evidence appears to be essential for just decision of case.
The court emphasized that recalling witnesses requires strong justification and cannot be used to delay trials or harass victims, aligning with established principles of fair trial under the law.
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
