ASIF MALANG MUJAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The order impugned is dtd. 15/7/2022 passed by the trial Court rejecting the application below Exhibit 36 for recall of victim for further cross-examination. It is the submission of learned counsel for the Applicant that the earlier advocate had not produced the material documents and no detailed cross-examination of the victim is taken. The documents produced along with the application Exhibit 36 are in the form of photographs. The trial Court observed that the application is vague and is silent as regards which document the defence wants to cross-examine the victim. Further, it has been observed by the trial Court that photographs are produced with application Exhibit 16, but the negatives are not produced. In such circumstances, the trial Court observed that it is not necessary to recall the victim for cross-examination.

(3.) The victim was cross-examined. Sec. 313 of the Cr.P.C. statement is recorded. So far as the finding of the trial Court that mere changing of Advocate is not a ground to permit recall of the victim for cross-examination is concerned, I see no reason to take a different view. However, learned counsel for the Applicant made an attempt to contend that apart from the offence of Sec. 354 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (" Cr.P.C .", for short), the applicant is also charged for the offence punishable under Sec. 354D of the Cr.P.C. which is for stalking. By the document which is in nature of photograph and a letter, the applicant-accused wants to show that the applicant and the victim are known to each other and shared a good relationship. However, I find that the Application Exhibit 36 is rejected on the ground that the same is vague as there is no document spelt out on which the defence wants to cross- examine the victim.