MANISH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present criminal miscellaneous petition under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C., is laid to the order dtd. 25/11/2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal and order dtd. 18/4/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karnal, whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 311 of Cr.P.C. stands dismissed.

(2.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner apparently in the most cursory, casual and apathetic manner. In as much as the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 311 of the Cr.P.C., which is the genesis of the dispute in the present case is not made part of the record of the case. No other pleadings forming part of the lis before the learned Trial Court or the learned Sessions Court have been made part of the record of the present criminal petition. Needless to say that in the absence of all these pleadings, which are the bare minimum requirements to evaluate the cause of grievance of the petitioner, present petition is an onerous task left for this Court to be adjudicated.

(3.) However, after evaluating the entire relevant material available on record of the case, just in the shape of the impugned orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate as well as the learned Sessions Judge. Facts germane to the adjudication of the present petition are that an FIR seems to have been registered against the petitioner bearing No.175, dtd. 23/2/2018 under Ss. 341, 354- D, 506 IPC, at Police Station City, Karnal. In the said case after the complainant was Examined-in-Chief as well as her cross-examination was conducted, the petitioner filed an application under Sec. 311 of the Cr.P.C. seeking recall of the complainant as a witness in the case. The said recall was sought on the grounds that the earlier counsel engaged by the petitioner had not put several documents to the complainant in her cross- examination. It was further averred that the previous counsel engaged by the petitioner did not even ask any question on conversation, photographs and compromise. As such, it was averred that the recall of the complainant as witness is imperative for just adjudication of the case.