(1.) LEAVE granted. The issue raised for consideration in these appeals is whether recall of witnesses, at the stage when statement of accused Under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Code of Criminal Procedure") has been recorded, could be allowed on the plea that the defence counsel was not competent and had not effectively cross -examined the witnesses, having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case.
(2.) FACTS relevant for deciding the issue lie in a narrow compass. On 6th December, 2014, a First Information Report was lodged alleging that the Respondent accused who was the driver of cab No. DL -1YD -7910, Swift Dzire, hired by the victim on 5th December, 2014 for returning home from her office committed rape on her. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded Under Section 164 Code of Criminal Procedure on 8th December, 2014. After investigation, charge sheet was fled before the Magistrate on 24th December, 2014. Since the accused was not represented by counsel, he was provided legal aid counsel. Thereafter on 2nd January, 2015, the accused engaged his private counsel M/s. Alok Kumar Dubey and Ankit Bhatia in place of the legal aid counsel. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Session. Charges were framed on 13th January, 2015. Prosecution evidence commenced on 15th January, 2015 and was closed on 31st January, 2015. The witnesses were duly cross -examined by the counsel engaged by the accused. Statement of the accused Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded on 3rd February, 2015. On 4th February, 2015, an application for recall of prosecutrix PW2 and formal witness PW -23 who booked the cab was made, but the same was rejected and the said order was never challenged. Thereafter, on 9th February, 2015, the accused engaged another counsel, who fled another application Under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure for recall of all the 28 prosecution witnesses on 16th February, 2015. The said application was dismissed on 18th February by the trial court but the same was allowed by the High Court vide impugned order dated 4th March, 2015 in a petition fled Under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. Even though the specific grounds urged in the application were duly considered and rejected, it was observed that recall of certain witnesses was deemed proper for ensuring fair trial.
(3.) ON 10th March, 2015, when the matter came up for hearing before this Court, stay of further proceedings was granted but since the prosecutrix had already been recalled in pursuance of the impugned order and further cross -examined, the said deposition was directed to be kept in the sealed cover and publication thereof by anyone in possession thereof was restrained.
ABOUT US "REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD." is a Company incorporated in 1991 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Since its inception to 1995, the Company was busy in carrying out the activities related to various Banks' Job Work..
Read More
Sales: sales@the-laws.com
Support: info@the-laws.com
8000853936
9376168072
27, 4TH FLOOR, Agrawal Center, Ashram Road, Income Tax, Ahmadabad 380014.
LOGIN