Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Sarankumar @ Ayyandurai – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by its, Inspector of Police – Respondent
ORDER :
A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.
This criminal original petition has been filed seeking quashment of the order dated 28.11.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1212 of 2025 in Spl.SC.No.122 of 2021 on the file of the Principal Special Court for Cases under POCSO Act, Salem.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are accused facing trial in Spl.SC.No.122 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 506(I) and 450 of IPC and Sections 6, 5(l), 5(n) and 5(j)(ii) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and they filed a petition under Section 311 of Cr.P.C./348 of BNSS in Crl.M.P.No.1212 of 2025, seeking to recall P.Ws.1 to 8 for cross- examination. However, the trial court, vide impugned order dated 28.11.2025, dismissed the said petition on the ground that the same has been filed only to drag on the proceedings. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that at the time of examination of the witnesses, the petitioners were in jail and therefore, they were unable to give proper instruction to their counsel, due to which, no proper cross-examination of the witnesses was conducted and that the petitioners have certain valid questions to be put to P.Ws.1
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 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....
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....
The court held that the accused has a right to cross-examine the victim, but restrictions apply to protect minors, emphasizing the need for relevance and care in questioning under the provisions of S....
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
