PRATAPJI SABAJI THAKOR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is an accused in FIR being C.R. No. 34 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Ss. 302 , 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 452 , 435 , 427 , 323 , 324 , 504 , 506(2) and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) and Sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. On being committed, the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 36 of 2016 was registered.

(2.) The applicant is before this Court challenging the order dtd. 21/4/2023 passed below Exh. 154 by the learned 3 rd Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Viramgam, whereby, an application under Sec. 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Code) of the present applicant came to be rejected wherein a prayer was made to reexamine / recall witness Rinkuben @ Kaliben Rameshji Thakore.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. K. K. Thakkar for the applicant states that the witness is an eye-witness whose deposition has been recorded at Exh. 113 in the aforesaid sessions case and as per her deposition, she alleges that the present applicant was present at the time of commission of offence and has played vital role in killing Ramtuji Bhikhaji Thakore along with the other accused. The learned advocate for the applicant states that the deposition is far from truth and is made under an ulterior motive, just to convict the applicant for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC etc. The prayer is made to recall the witness on the ground that the deposition of the said witness was hurriedly noted wherein, it has been stated that, she is the daughter of the deceased, whereas, actually, she is the niece of the deceased and is an interested witness, whose deposition is required to be tested on the basis of the Evidence Act and states that, sufficient opportunity is required to be granted to rebut the deposition, where the deposition does not disclose the correct facts and alleged offence was committed in view of the rivalry, where the deceased had killed the elder brother of the present applicant. It is submitted that when such a question was raised to the witness, she has completely denied and the credibility of the deposition is under doubt and therefore, the witness is required to be reexamined.