HEERAWATI Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Singh/P.K. Singh, learned counsel's for O.P. No.2 and Sri N.K.S Yadav, the learned A.G.A.

(2.) On 13.10.2015, one Sadanand Pandey, claiming himself to be the Principal of Laxmi Shanker Inter College, Rajwadi, appeared as A.P.W.-1 in an inquiry under Section 7-A of the Act.

(3.) It is submitted that neither the Public Prosecutor nor the applicant had any knowledge of the summoning of any witness in an inquiry under Section 7-A of the Act. Subsequently, O.P. No.2/the accused filed an application for summoning three witnesses in support of alleged juvenility of which neither any notice was given to the Public Prosecutor or to the counsel for the applicant, even though the applicant had filed his objections/supplementary objections in response to the application, claiming juvenility on 12.8.2015/23.9.2015. After examination-in-chief of Sadanand Pandey (A.P.W.-1) on the alleged juvenility on 13.10.2015 was over, the Public Prosecutor initiated cross-examination of A.P.W.-1 and during the process, a question was put by the counsel for the applicant which was objected to by counsel for O.P. No.2 that the informant has no right to cross-examine a witness under Section 301 Cr.P.C, which objection is upheld under the order impugned.