Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16455 of 2018 Applicant :- Netram Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Azad Khan, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA for the State.
This application is directed against an order dated 13.04.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Bijnor in ST No.86 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.360 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 304B, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, PS Syohara, District Bijnor.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the order impugned has refused an application brought by the applicant under Section 311 CrPC seeking to further cross- examine PW-1, Sukhram Singh and PW-2 Smt. Somti. The application made for the purpose being an application dated 23.11.2017 has been rejected by the impugned order dated 13.04.2018. The right to cross-examine an accused is one of the most important tools in aid of defence and the right to fair trial depends for the much part of it on an effective cross- examination. The applicant has even indicated in his application the questions broadly on which he wishes to cross-examine PW-1 & 2 but the same has been rejected. The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application under Section 311 CrPC on the basis of a priori reasoning and presumption that the said application to recall these witnesses for further cross- examination is on account of the fact that the said witnesses have been won over and now they are sought to be recalled to demolish the prosecution case.
There is no basis for the Trial Judge to conclude that the prosecution witnesses have turned hostile by assuming it to be so. Even if the witnesses do turn hostile at this stage all that has been said in the past is on record and would be considered while assessing evidence. It is not that what the witnesses now say in their further cross-examination would be accepted as gospel. On the other hand if certain important issues are required to be decided without the material facts that may be elicited during the proposed further cross-examination it would amount to denial of the right to a fair defence to the accused.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 who has put in appearance has no cogent answer as to why PW-1 & 2 be not cross-examined on the issues which the defence wants to further cross-examine them about.
Considering the aforesaid matters this application is allowed. The impugned order dated 13.04.2018 is set aside.
It is directed that the trial court will permit the applicants to cross-examine PW-1, Sukhram Singh and PW-2, Smt. Somti on a date to be fixed by the trial court within 15 days next from receipt of a copy of this order. The cross-examination will be concluded without adjournment on a day to day basis.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Shahroz