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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 64162

O R D E R

The petitioner is the accused in SC No. 157/2021 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO) Aluva (for short, “the Court below”). He faces trial for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 450, 354A, 376(2)(n), and 506(i) of the IPC.

2. The trial commenced. PW1, the victim, was examined. Another crime was also registered against the petitioner as Crime No. 464/2020 of Edathala police station at the instance of the friend of PW1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations in both cases are more or less identical. PW1 in this case is a witness in Crime No. 464/2020 of Edathala police station. When PW1 was examined, the learned counsel for the petitioner wanted to put questions pertaining to the statement given by PW1 in Crime No. 464/2020. It is submitted that the Court below did not permit the petitioner's counsel to put questions pertaining to the statement given by PW1 in another case. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. I have heard Sri. Santhosh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. G Sudheer, the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Annexure A5 is the copy of the deposition of PW1. In Page 18 of the deposition, it is stated that the questions put by the counsel for the petitioner was disallowed as it was not relevant to the matter in issue in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision of the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Babu [1999 (4) SCC 621]. The question considered was whether the statement of a witness recorded under S.161 of Cr.P.C. in one particular crime could be used against that witness in any other trial, enquiry or proceedings by the accused. It was held that the previous statements of a witness made in the course of another investigation can be used in the course of another criminal trial. Hence, I am of the view that the petitioner has every right to put questions to PW1 with regard to the statement given by PW1, the victim in another crime.

In the light of the above findings, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court below to permit the petitioner to put questions to PW1 in her cross-examination regarding her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. in Crime No. 464/2020 of Edathala police station in accordance with law.

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