NARENDER Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal the appellant challenges the impugned judgment dtd. 20/3/2018 convicting the appellant for offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC and the order on sentence dtd. 4/5/2018 directing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of ?10,000/-

(2.) The allegations of the prosecution against the appellant are that he committed the murder of his wife Anju by strangulating her to death. The main challenge of the appellant in this appeal and the application filed is that during the substantial course of trial, the appellant was not represented by a lawyer and hence the trial in the absence of a lawyer has seriously prejudiced him. The appellant by the application thus seeks recalling of all the prosecution witnesses so that he is ensured a fair trial.

(3.) A perusal of the Trial Court Record would reveal that when the trial started at the stage of arguments on charge and till PW-8 was recorded, the appellant was represented by a counsel duly appointed by him. However, at the time when PW-9 to PW-18 were recorded from 17/11/2017, the appellant was not represented by the counsel and thus these witnesses were examined with opportunity to the accused himself to cross-examine the said witnesses. Thereafter, on 11/12/2017 another counsel from legal aid was assigned the case and on the same date PW-20 and PW-21, PW-22 were examined and discharged. Obviously, since learned counsel for the legal aid had been appointed on that day itself, there was no cross- examination of the said witnesses done by the legal aid counsel. However, on the next date PW-19 was cross-examined by the learned counsel on behalf of the appellant provided through legal aid to the appellant and thus PW-19 was cross-examined but she failed to cross-examine PW-23 and PW- 24. Though on a subsequent date cross-examination of PW-25 and PW-29 was duly carried out.