Back
AMAN CHAUDHARY
Harbhajan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. condonation of delay in filing (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel's absence prevents cross-examination (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. precedent for fault of counsel (Para 6 , 10) |
| 4. importance of cross-examination (Para 11 , 12 , 14 , 19) |
| 5. court's duty and powers under section 311 cr.p.c. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. order granting opportunity to cross-examine (Para 20 , 21) |
Judgment
Mr. Aman Chaudhary, J. :-CRM-34832-2022
The present application is for condonation of delay of 745 days in filing the present revision petition, which is supported by the affidavit of the petitioner.
In view of the reasons stated in the application that the earlier revision petition filed by the petitioner i.e. CRR-3649-2018, which was adjourned sine die on 8.1.2019 and later on, vide order dated 6.9.2022, it was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh, the present application is allowed and the delay of 745 days in filing the revision petition is hereby condoned.
CRR 1910-2022 (O&M)
1. The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 1.6.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for recalling the Investi
Recall of witness – Paramount requirement is just decision and for that purpose essentiality of a person to be recalled and re-examined has to be ascertained.
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 right to cross-examine witnesses is a statutory and fundamental right, crucial for ensuring a fair trial, necessitating courts to allow such opportunities to the accused.
Re-examination - Scope of section 311 Cr.P.C. - Section 311, Cr.P.C. that request for re-examination has been made solely on ground that Senior Counsel has been engaged in place of a Junior Counsel a....
The right to cross-examine witnesses is not absolute and requires justification; a mere change of counsel does not alone satisfy the criteria for recalling a witness under Section 311 CrPC.
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 a petitioner must avail the opportunities given by the court, and a mere change of counsel does not suffice as a reason for not cross-examinin....
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
