IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 17.03.2025 Pankaj ….Petitioner V/S State of Haryana and another ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Ms. Devanshi Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, D.A.G., Haryana.

****

NAMIT KUMAR , J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for setting aside the order dated 08.01.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for recalling of PW4- complainant for cross-examination in FIR No.354 dated 28.10.2020 registered under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 363 & 366-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Rajendra Park, Gurugram, has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the earlier counsel did not cross-examine the PW4-complainant (father of the victim), therefore, a new counsel was engaged and an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for recalling of PW4-complainant for cross-examination was filed which has been rejected vide impugned order dated 08.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram.

3. On receipt of advance notice, learned State counsel has put in appearance and opposed the prayer made in the present petition by stating that sufficient opportunities were granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW4-complainant and the impugned order is perfectly legal and valid.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel and perused the record.

5. Perusal of zimini orders shows that on 08.08.2023, statement of father of the victim was recorded as PW4 and his cross- examination was deferred on the request made by proxy counsel of the petitioner as the arguing counsel was not available and the case was adjourned for 22.08.2023 subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/-. On 22.08.2023, the matter was adjourned for 26.09.2023 as no prosecution evidence was present. On 26.09.2023, since the petitioner was not present, therefore, warrant of arrest against him was issued for 18.11.2023. On 18.11.2023, case was called several times, however, no one was present on behalf of the petitioner and S.H.O. concerned was directed to take charge of Child-in-Conflict with Law (the petitioner) and be produced before the Court on 12.12.2023. On 12.12.2023, fresh power of attorney on behalf of the petitioner was filed and the petitioner was produced before the Court and in the post lunch session, the application filed by the petitioner for grant of regular bail was allowed and he was ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds in a sum of Rs.50,000/- and the case was adjourned to 15.01.2024. On 15.01.2024, testimony of one PW Constable Rahul was recorded as PW5 and since the complainant and victim could not appear before the Court despite bailable warrant of arrest served upon them, therefore, their presence was ordered to be secured by issuing warrant of arrest for 13.02.2024. On 13.02.2024, PW4-complainant appeared before the Court but could not be examined on the request of learned defence counsel and the case was adjourned for 05.03.2024. On 05.03.2024, PW4-complainant appeared before the Court but again could not be examined on the request of learned defence counsel and the case was adjourned for 19.04.2024. On 19.04.2024, PW4-complainant was present but could not be examined as the petitioner did not appear before the Court and the case was adjourned for 23.05.2024. On 23.05.2024, the petitioner was produced before the Court by the S.H.O. concerned and on a regular bail application moved on behalf of the petitioner, the same was allowed and he was released from protective custody and the case was adjourned for 12.07.2024. On 12.07.2024, PW4-complainant was present but