Back
RAJESH KUMAR
Subhan Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present revision application has been filed against the order dated 26.07.2018, passed in Misc. Criminal Application No.737 of 2018, arising out of Tatisilway P.S. Case No.43 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.2914 of 2014 (S.T. No.683 of 2014), whereby the court of learned A.J.C.-VI, Ranchi, has dismissed the prayer of the petitioner to recall the P.W.-3, Parvati Devi, P.W.-4, Rajesh Mahto, P.W.-5, Amarjit Goswami and P.W.-6, Pritam Mahto, for the purpose of cross-examination.
2. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid witnesses have been examined on 04.05.2017. The conducting lawyer in the court below was ill and as such, a petition has been filed on the same day, which has been taken note by the court below, but still the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses, has not been deferred, as requested by the junior counsel for the petitioner, and the court below has rejected the application on the ground that this is a delaying tactics on the part of the defence counsel.
It has further been submitted by the learned senior counsel that the right of cross-examination is a valuable right to the victim and it cann
The central legal point established is the importance of fair trial and the accused's right to cross-examine witnesses, allowing the recall of witnesses for cross-examination to ensure the collection....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exercise of discretion under section 231(2) of Cr.PC must be based on sufficient reasons justifying the deferral of cross-examination, and....
The discretion to defer cross-examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously to prevent potential prejudice to the defense, particularly in cases involving related witn....
The accused persons should not be forced to cross-examine the witness if the application filed under section 231(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is allowed, and a criminal court cannot alter or rev....
The court has the discretion to defer the cross-examination of a witness under Sections 231(2) and 242(3) Cr.P.C., but this discretion must be exercised judiciously and in accordance with the princip....
The right to a fair trial is paramount, and courts must ensure that all relevant evidence is considered, even if it requires recalling witnesses after significant delays.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of Section 311 of Cr.P.C. allow a Court to summon a witness if their evidence is essential for the just decision of the case. T....
Discretion under Section 231(2) of Cr.P.C. allows deferring cross-examination to protect the accused's right to a fair trial, balancing between the defense's interest and prosecution’s prerogative.
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
