Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2339 of 2018 Revisionist :- Anil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Pradeep Narayan Pandey,Ramanand Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present revision has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 22.6.2018 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act/Addl. Session Judge Court No.1, Basti in Special Session Trial No. 55 of 2016, State Vs. Anil, arising out of Case No. 1221 of 2016, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Purani Basti, District Basti, by which the application filed by the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the applicant states that the PW-1/mother of the victim was examined by the prosecution on 30.5.2018, she was also offered for cross-examination to the applicant. Some cross-examination had admittedly taken place on 30.5.2018, which was recorded as concluded by the learned court below.
It has then been submitted that on account of in experience of junior counsel engaged by the applicant it was later discovered that certain question remained in the cross-examine of PW-1. In this regard, it is further stated that the applicant is in jail.
In the above background the application appears to have filed an application on 22.6.2018 seeking recall of PW-1 for further cross- examination. The same has been rejected by the learned court below for the reason given in the order dated 22.6.2018. According to the learned court below, cross-examination has been done and, therefore, no further opportunity was required to be given to the applicant.
In such fact, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that it being a serious offence and opportunity having been sought on account of the fact that the cross-examination was not complete, one opportunity should have been granted to the applicant on such terms as the learned court below may have considered. The aforesaid argument merits acceptance in view of the fact that the trial is also not very old being 2of year 016 and the application that was filed by the applicant was also not delayed having been filed within one month from the date of the last cross- examination of PW-1 and the prosecution evidence is still continuing.
The present revision is allowed. Learned court below shall provide only one date to the applicant to cross-examine the PW-1. The applicant further undertakes not to seek any undue or long adjournment.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Mini