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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 24590

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Vijayakumar, J
B.Faizal Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
Crl.OP.(MD)No.5597 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.S.Suresh Manickam
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram

The court emphasized the importance of fair cross-examination rights under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C.

Headnote:The judgment analyzes the provisions under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. regarding cross-examination rights. The petitioner’s failure to cross-examine witnesses on scheduled dates was due to counsel’s unavailability. The Court finds justification in allowing the recall of the witnesses PW.16 and PW.19 for cross-examination, ultimately allowing the petition and setting aside the lower court's order regarding the same.

Table of Content
1. application under section 311 of cr.p.c. challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court allows recall of witnesses for cross-examination. (Para 4)
3. final decision: petition allowed. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the accused person in Spl.S.C.No.

14 of 2025 on the file of the Special Sessions Court for POCSO, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District, challenging the order rejecting an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner herein had filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., to recall PW.16 to PW.19 for the purpose of cross examination. PW.16 and P.W.19 have been cross examined between 09.12.2025 and 30.12.2025. The present application has been filed on 09.01.2026. The trial Court has proceeded to dismiss the application on the ground that the petitioner has not chosen to cross examine the witnesses on the same day and the trial to be completed within a period of one year as mandated under the POCSO Act. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

3. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Counsel could not be present between 09.12.2025 and 30.12.2025, in view of certain difficulties expressed by the Counsel in e-filing and therefore, he could not cross examine P.W.16 to P.W.19 who are official witnesses. The case is posted on 25.03.2026 for examination of PW.20. Therefore, he is ready to cross examine PW.16 to P.W.19 on 25.03.2026, itself.

4. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already cross examined the victim girl and only the official respondents are sought to be recalled for cross examination and also considering the fact that P.W.20 is yet to be chief examined, this Court is inclined to allow the application.

5. In view of the above said facts, the order passed by the trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.7 of 2026 is hereby set aside and the petitioner is permitted to recall P.W.16 to P.W.19 for the purpose of cross examination. The cross examination shall be completed by the petitioner on 25.03.2026. It is made clear that no further time shall be granted to the petitioner herein. In case if the first accused prefers to cross examine P.W.16 to P.W.19, the same also can be conducted on 25.03.2026 and no further adjournment shall be granted to the Counsel for the first accused.

6. With the above said observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

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