JUDGMENT :

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.

1. Case is taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing.

2. Reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1 is taken on record.

3. This order shall dispose of the above noted five petitions, as the challenge therein is to the orders passed by the Courts below, whereby the petitioner’s application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the complainant for further crossexamination, was dismissed.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, interalia, submits that though the petitioner had given his no objection for recording of the testimony of the complainant in his absence, yet his said concession was with a rider to provide him an opportunity to participate in the proceedings through video conferencing from the Tihar Jail, where he was lodged in FIR No.37 dated 19.01.2018, at the time, when the crossexamination of the complainant had been conducted and completed. Learned counsel further contends that when the petitioner was enlarged on bail on 23.07.2019, he had inspected the file and came to know that the most relevant questions could not be put to the complainant in her cross-examination, by the petitioner’s counsel. It was only thereafter that the p