KAUSHIK BISHT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. gives an exclusive power to the Court as defined under the Cr.P.C. that it may at "any stage"? of an inquiry, trial or "other proceedings"?, under this Code, may summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in evidence, though not summoned as a witness in the earlier set of proceedings.

(2.) The argument, which has been extended by the learned counsel for the revisionist, while challenging the order dated 21st January, 2019, by virtue of which, the F.T.C./ Additional District and Session Judge/ Special Judge POCSO Haldwani, Nainital, in Special Session Trial No. 12 of 2017, State Vs. Anand Singh Rana and others, which was being tried before the Sessions Court, had exercised its powers under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for the purposes of summoning of the witnesses, who were named as Krishna Rani, Maya Pandey, who were the Superintendent of Government Balika Grah, Almora. The matter which was pending consideration for the trial, was a trial in relation to the offence under Sections 376 (2), 323, 504 IPC to be read with Section 5/6 POCSO Act as well as in relation to the accused Sushma Singh, it was the trial, which was being conducted under Sections 366-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. to be read Section 21 (1) and 16/17 of the POCSO Act and for other co-accused, namely Anand Rana, it was an offence, which was being tried under Sections 376 (2), 323, 506 I.P.C. to be read with Section 5/6 POCSO Act. At the stage, when the proceedings were pending consideration before the Sessions Court, the prosecution had moved an application, paper No. 83-kha, by invoking the provisions of Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for summoning some of the witnesses at the stage when the trial was pending consideration before the Sessions Court, before it comes to any logical conclusion with regard to the offences, which were levelled against the accused revisionist.

(3.) By the application, preferred under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. it gives an avenue and ample of powers to the Trial Court to exercise its domain at any stage of the proceedings, to call upon the witness, which the Court considers it to be necessary to be considered for the purposes of better elucidation of the controversy and for settling of the offences as against the present accused persons by their examination and considering their statements before drawing any logical conclusion.