IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P. NO.7652/2019 BETWEEN:
ADIL PARVEEZ S/O. LATE TAMEEZUDDIN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.25, 2ND FLOOR, AKRAM PASH’S HOUSE, CHINNAPPA BUILDING, 8TH “C” MAIN, OLD GURAPPANNA PALYA, BANGALORE-560004 PERMANENT ADDRESS: RAHIKATOLA VILLAGE, MOHAMADDIYA POST, DARGAV TANA, POORNIMA DISTRICT, BIHAR STATE-800001.
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION, MICO LAYOUT, BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR-01.
... PETITIONER 2. KUM. UMME KULSUM D/O. ARIFULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, R/AT. NO.4, GHOUSE HOUSE, 8TH ‘B’ CROSS, BIRIYANI GALLI, MADHARSAB LAYOUT, NEW GURAPPANAPALYA, BANGALORE.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R.D. RENUKARADHYA, HCGP., FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION CR.P.C. 482 OF CR.P.C. PRYAING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2019, IN SPL. C. NO.138/2015, LIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS UDGE CCH-55, SITTING IN THE CHILD FRIENDLY COURT, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO CROSS EXAMINE PW- TO PW4 AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1.
2. Petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the order passed in Spl.C.No.138/2015 dated 17.10.2019 by the LIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, CCH-55 sitting in the Child Friendly Court, Bengaluru Urban District on the application preferred by the petitioner-accused under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.
3. Petitioner preferred two applications under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. praying for recalling of the witnesses, namely, PWs.1 to 4 and make themselves available for cross examination. The said applications came to be dismissed on the ground that cross examination has been taken as ‘Nil’ and the same has not been objected to by the other side. Further, the Special Public Prosecutor has filed objections to both the applications, labelling them as a dilatory tactics and that the case is pending since 2015.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would invite the attention of this Court to the order dated 28.09.2016, on which date, PW.1 and CW.6 were present and on the last date of hearing, cross examination of PW.1 was deferred on the ground that the other witnesses including the victim will be cross examined in one go i.e., on the same day. On the said date, the victim was not present on the ground that she was having mid-term examination and hence, the evidence of PW.1 and CW.6 were not taken. The learned counsel for the accused was present before the Court and he informed the Court that he would go on with the cross examination on the day when all the witnesses are available without seeking any adjournment. It is submitted that, thereafter by the order dated 4.7.2019 and 10.10.2019, the trial Court was pleased to discharge PWs.1 to 4 on the premise that, accused was not proceeded with cross examination.
5. Learned HCGP on perusing the order dated 28.09.2016 would fairly submit that the instant impugned order dated 17.10.2019 be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the Court below and the accused be directed to expedite the cross examination from the next date of hearing itself.
6. The submission of the learned HCGP is placed on record. Impugned order dated 17.10.2019 passed in Spl.C. No.138/2015 by the LIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge CCH-55 sitting in the Child Friendly Court, Bengaluru Urban District, is quashed.
7. The trial Court is directed to permit the accused to commence cross examination of the evidence and the same shall be completed on a day to day basis without affording any adjournments. In the event of all the witnesses not being present, the accused shall ensure cross examination of the witnesses as and when they present themselves.
Accordingly, petition stands allowed. Copy of the order be furnished.
Sd/- JUDGE BS