NIPENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Missing report was lodged by the informant on 03.07.2015, at police station, Kalagarh, District Pauri Garhwal, under Section 365 IPC against unknown person, stating therein, that the daughter of informant's sister-in-law, aged 18 years, is missing from his house. Her whereabouts are not known.

(2.) During investigation, victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. After investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused-applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A IPC. After submission of charge sheet, charge was framed against accused-applicant. Prosecution opened its case. Prosecutrix was examined as PW2. Her cross-examination was also over. Thereafter, an application was moved on behalf of the accused seeking permission from the court below for asking certain questions, which were left during cross-examination of PW2. Said application was rejected by the trial court. Aggrieved against the same, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed.

(3.) Learned trial court has cited certain reasons as to why the court below was not inclined to allow the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. This Court need not reproduce those reasons for the sake of brevity. Suffice will it be to say that if certain questions have not been asked on behalf of the accused, the accused-applicant has still a chance to ask those questions with other prosecution witnesses, who are yet to be examined. Further, the accused-applicant can plead those facts in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Still further, the accused-applicant has chance to adduce that evidence when he enters the defence.