VED PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court is Ved Prakash Sharma, a witness in case FIR No.202/1998 under Section 386/ 511 IPC, PS Malviya Nagar who is aggrieved by the order dated 06.02.2012 passed by learned MM on the application under Section 311 CrPC filed by the accused Rajender Kumar Gupta, respondent No.2 herein. The impugned order reveals that the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C requesting to recall PWs - 1, 4, 5 and 6 for cross examination on the ground that the witnesses could not be cross examined properly as the counsel provided by Legal Aid did not appear before the Court, was allowed by the Court finding that the witnesses have not been cross examined through defence counsel.

(2.) Mr. Pradeep Arya, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has placed on record the statement of PW-1 Ved Prakash Sharma recorded in the Court as Annexure-C which shows that examination of witness is running into just two pages and when the witness was tendered for cross examination, accused informed the Court that he has been provided a counsel Mr. Amir Hassan Haq, Advocate from Legal Aid. The learned defence counsel did not appear before the Court nor sent any request and in that circumstance, the request of the accused was declined and witness was cross examined by accused at length.

(3.) Mr. Pradeep Arya, Advocate for the petitioner has further submitted that when the petitioner i.e. PW-1 Ved Prakash Sharma has been cross examined by the accused at length on all material details, just because his counsel could not appear on that day, is no reason to allow the application under Section 311 CrPC after a long gap of about seven years. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon S.K.Kapoor vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi,2010 7 AD(Del) 572; Mangey Khan vs. State (NCT of Delhi),2009 4 JCC 2506; and Vinay Kumar vs. State,2007 4 JCC 2683, in support of his contentions.