1
Cr.A.No.2419/2020
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2419/2020
Rakesh Kushwaha
Vs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh
Counsel for the appellant
:
Shri B.J. Chourasia, Advocate
Counsel for the Respondent/State: Shri Manhar Dixit, Panel
Lawyer.
Corum :
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Atul Sreedharan
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sunita Yadav
******
( 12-11-2021)
Per : Sunita Yadav, J.
Heard on IA No.4903/2020 an application under Section 389(1) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence filed on
behalf of the appellant-Rakesh Kushwaha.
2.
The appellant stands convicted for the offences punishable under
Section 363 of IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years with
a fine of Rs.500/-, Section 376(3) of IPC and has been sentenced to
undergo RI for 22 years with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, Section 354 of IPC and
has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs.500/-,
Section 5(n) r/w Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
2
Offences Act, 2012,and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 20 years
and fine of Rs.5,000/-, and Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and has been sentenced to undergo R.I.
for 5 years with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulations.
3.
While hearing the aforesaid IA, it reveals that initially the charge-
sheet under Section 354 of IPC and Section 7/8 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was filed against the
appellant/accused. The learned trial Court framed the charges under
Sections 363, 354 of IPC and Section 10 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on 10/08/2017. After recording the
statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., at the stage of
examination of defence witnesses, an application under Section 216 of
Cr.P.C. was filed by the Special Public Prosecutor on 16/01/2020 which
was allowed by the trial court on 28/01/2020 and additional charges under
Section 376(3) of IPC and section 5 /6 of POCSO Act were framed. After
that the case was fixed on 31/01/2020 for recording plea of the accused.
On 31.01.2020 plea of accused was recorded and the case was again fixed
for examination of defence witnesses without giving an opportunity to the
appallant/accused to further cross-examine the prosecution witnesses with
reference to the additional charges under Section 376(3) of IPC and
section 5 /6 of POCSO Act. At this juncture the provisions of Section 217
of the Cr.P.C. need to be seen which provides “whenever a charge is
altered or added to by the Court after the commencement of the trial, the
3
prosecutor or the accused shall be allowed -
“(a)
To recall or re-summon, and examine with reference to
such alteration or addition, any witness who may have been
examined, unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in
writing, considers that the prosecutor or the accused, as the
case may be, desires to recall or re-examine such witness for
the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of
justice;
(b)
also to call any further witness whom the Court may
think to be material”.
4.
On perusal of the record it is clear that the learned trial Court has
ignored the mandatory provisions of 217 of Cr.P.C. by not giving the
accused an opportunity to further cross-examine the prosecution witnesses
with reference to the additional charges. The trial Court has also not
recorded any reason in writing for not recalling the prosecution witnesses
with reference to additional charges.
5.
Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. clearly mandates that it is compulsory on
the part of the Court to check that no prejudice is caused to the accused
and he is allowed to have a fair trial and that is inbuilt safeguard in this
Section. It is compulsory for the learned trial Court to facilitate the trial in
such a manner that no prejudice in favour of any party arises and a fair
trial is affected. The accused must always be made aware of the charges
which is framed against him so that he can properly lead his evidence. In
this case, the above aspect of the trial as has been ignored by the learned
trial Court.
6.
In the light of the above, the impugned judgment and order dated
28/02/2020 is set aside and this case is hereby remanded to the concerned
4
trial Court with a direction to give an opportunity to the appellant/accused
for further cross-examination of the witnes
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.