SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Raj) 1705

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Sushil Kumar Purohit – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Another – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 280 of 2023
Decided On : 21-04-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: H.S. Shrimali
For the Respondent: Mool Singh Bhati, P.P.
For the Complainant : C.S. Kotwani

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Criminal miscellaneous petition - Petitioner sought to cross-examine the complainant after the right was closed by the trial court - The right to cross-examine is vital for proving innocence - Court finds it just to grant one last opportunity for cross-examination before trial completion. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Rights of Accused - The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental in criminal proceedings to ensure fairness in the trial process. (Para 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was an accused in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; the trial court had previously denied cross-examination of the complainant.

Findings of Court:
The orders of the lower courts closing the cross-examination were quashed, allowing a final opportunity for the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to cross-examine the complainant after the right was previously closed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that the right to cross-examine is essential for an accused's defense, and thus granted the petitioner one final opportunity to ensure justice.

Result: The impugned orders were quashed, and one opportunity for cross-examination was granted.

Table of Content
1. court's authority in handling criminal matters. (Para 1)
2. right to cross-examine as a fundamental right. (Para 2 , 3)
3. granting opportunity for cross-examination. (Para 4 , 5)
4. quashing of previous orders for just cause. (Para 6)
5. conclusion of the petition with orders issued. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT :

MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.

The instant misc. petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against order dated 12.08.2022, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No. 6, Bikaner whereby he dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner and affirmed the order dated 18.06.2022, passed by learned Special Judicial Magistrate (NI Act Cases) No. 2, Bikaner whereby he closed the right of the petitioner to cross examination the complainant.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that complainant-respondent No. 2 filed a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act against the petitioner in which complainant appeared for his evidence but no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner to cross-examination him. On that account, the trial court closed the cross-examination of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the order dated 18.06.2022, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Session Judge, Bikaner which was transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge No. 6, Bikaner. The said revision was also dismissed vide order dated 12.08.2022. It is submitted that the right of the petitioner may be infringed, if he is not allowed to cross-examine the complainant. In these circumstances, one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner for cross-examination of the complainant-respondent No. 2.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. I have heard the rival contention of the parties and gone through the material available on record.

5. The petitioner is an accused in this case, however, since the right of cross-examination is a valuable right in order to prove his innocence, therefore, in these circumstances, it will be just and appropriate to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to crossexamine the complainant. Accordingly, in the interest of Justice, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant.

6. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 18.06.2022 and 12.08.2022 passed by the courts below are hereby quashed and set aside. The trial Court is directed to fix a date and summon the complainant-respondent No. 2 for cross-examination by the petitioner. It is clarified that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner for cross-examination and trial Court will conclude the trial expeditiously.

7. The present criminal misc. petition is hereby disposed of. Stay petition also stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top