ENISTAR RANI Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N. Khera, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. N. Syngkon, learned Asst. PP. appearing for the State-respondents. By this application, a challenge has been made by the petitioner to the order dtd. 30/10/2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) East Khasi Hills, Shillong in Special POCSO Case No. 4 of 2018 whereby the learned Trial Court allowed the prosecution to recall the survivor to depose before the Court.

(2.) The brief fact of the case, shorn of unnecessary details, is that the petitioner has been put to face trial as an accused in Special POCSO Case No. 4 of 2018 under Sec. 3(a) 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. In the course of the trial, the survivor was examined as prosecution witness on 18/7/2022 and discharged. However, before the recording of the statement of the petitioner under Sec. 313 Cr.PC, the prosecution filed an application dtd. 8/9/2022 seeking recalling of the survivor. The petitioner filed an objection against the prayer by filing an objection dtd. 4/1/2023. The learned Special Judge after hearing the parties and on perusal of the material on record passed the impugned order dtd. 30/10/2024 allowing the application for recalling the survivor. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has come up with the present application before this Court challenging the impugned order.

(3.) Mr. N. Khera, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the basic principle of law with regard to recalling of the witness and erroneously pass the impugned order.