SHADAAN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.

(2.) This revision has been filed for quashing of the order dated 21.09.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Faizabad in Special Session Trial No. 78 of 2018, arising out of F.I.R. No. 76 of 2018, under Sections 376, 506, 377 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Cantt., District Faizabad.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that after investigation, charge sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer in F.I.R. No. 76 of 2018 (supra), on which cognizance was taken by the court below and thereafter the case was registered as S.S.T. No. 78 of 2018. After framing of charges, prosecution was allowed to produce the witnesses before the trial court. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submitted that since the revisionist was not in a position to engage lawyer, as a result, Amicus Curiae, for defending the revisionist, was provided by the trial court at the State expenses. Examination-in-chief of the witnesses of P.W. 1 to P.W. 9 was conducted before the trial court, but since the opportunity to cross examine them was not availed by the Amicus Curiae, as a result, it was closed by the trial court. He has further submitted that though in another case, Amicus Curiae cross-examined the witnesses, but the same was not real and effective. In such circumstances, application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved by the revisionist for recall of the witnesses to cross-examine them, but the same was rejected by the court below vide impugned order dated 21st September, 2019 with the observation that the Amicus Curiae denied the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses on the advise of the revisionist.