VISHRAM SINGH RAWAT Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission

(2.) The jurisdiction of this court u/S.407 Cr.P.C. is invoked seeking transfer of the Special Sessions Case No.11/2015 (Lokayukt) pending before the First Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Morena to the adjoining district of Gwalior or to any other place and for quashment of the order dated 26/5/2017 by which the right of the defence to cross-examine PW-5 Ram Gopal ASI posted in Second Battalion SAF Gwalior has been closed.

(3.) The above said prayer is founded on the factual matrix that on 26/5/2017 PW-5 Ram Gopal was subjected to examination/crossexamination in Sp. Sessions Case No. 11/15 (Lokahukt). On the said date, examination-in-chief was conducted by Special Public Prosecutor Shri P.K.Shrivastava during pre-lunch session whereafter the same was concluded. Immediately thereafter cross-examination by Shri Harswarop Maheshwari, counsel for the accused commenced but during course of cross-examination learned counsel for the defence Shri Maheshwari walked out of the court room complaining that the deposition being recorded is at variance to what PW-5 is actually stating. Thereafter another defence counsel Shri Pachori appeared and informed the Presiding Officer that since recording of deposition is not in line with the actual revelation made by PW-5, he would not cross-examine the said witness. At this juncture, the Presiding Officer recorded a note after making query from PW-5 and also from the Special Public Prosecutor that the dictation being taken by the deposition writer is exactly the same as disclosed by PW-5. The Presiding Officer further recorded that refusal on the part of the defence counsel to conclude cross-examination of the said PW-5 amounts to contempt of the court. The Presiding Officer further recorded that a copy of the order passed by him on 26/5/2017 be sent to the District & Sessions Judge, Morena and also to the Registrar General of the High Court at Jabalpur for information and appropriate action. Thereafter, the Presiding Officer asked the accused whether he would like to cross-examine the PW-5 Ram Gopal to which the accused declined and responded that the same counsel whom he has engaged will conduct the cross-examination. At this stage, the Presiding Officer closed the right of the accused to cross-examine PW-5.