SURENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) The facts, as revealed by order dated 19.1.2011, are that on 19.8.2009, the case was fixed for evidence. Examination-in-chief of P.W. 1 Biri Singh was recorded before lunch and the case was posted after lunch for cross-examination. At about 2:35 p.m., the application for adjournment was moved on behalf of the defence counsel on the ground that he was busy in another Court. The said application was rejected and opportunity for cross-examination of P.W.1 was closed. On 17.9.2009, application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved by accused for opportunity of cross-examination of P.W.1, which was rejected.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that on 19.8.2009, the applicants' counsel could not appear before the trial Court for cross-examination of P.W.1, as he was busy in another Court and, therefore, learned trial Court ought to have adjourned the case and should not have closed the opportunity for cross-examination. Subsequently, when application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved, the same ought to have been allowed and should not have been rejected whimsically. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that by rejecting the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., valuable rights of the applicants for cross-examination of P.W.1 have been adversely effected. The accused in a criminal case cannot be punished simply for the reason that his counsel could not appear in Court for the purpose of cross-examination. Reasonable opportunity of cross-examination should always be granted to the accused. It is not the case of the prosecution that the applicants were in any manner abusing the process of law. P.W. 1 was examined on 19.8.2009 and on that date, adjournment was sought by counsel for the defence and I fail to understand any reason why this adjournment should not have been granted. No doubt, the trial Court is under a duty to dispose of criminal case expeditiously, but it must also be kept in mind that justice hurried is justice buried.