VITHAL KUSUMA Vs. GULLA SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One is filed by State represented by Public Prosecutor and other by the defecto complainant impugning the order of the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in Crl.MP.No.2088/2018, dated 09.04.2018 in the pending Criminal Case in CC.No.227/2009.

(2.) Pw3-Defacto complainant was examined in chief twice and was cross examined at three sittings as can be seen from the very record undisputedly. It is the grievance that it appears against the Public Prosecutor in addressing letter to the Director of Prosecutions from the change of another Public Prosecutor to conduct the case. The new Public Prosecutor filed the petition for recall of PW3 for further examination. The petition dated 04.04.2018 filed on 04.04.2018 reads that by then 11 witnesses were examined including victim as PW3 and after completion of cross examination of PW3, she filed affidavit in Court praying to re-examine saying that she could not explain certain crucial issues during cross examination and could not state certain important facts during chiefexamination and it was returned as not maintainable. Meanwhile, proceedings issued by Director of Prosecutions changing the Public Prosecutor and PW3 contacted and sent an affidavit that he or she could not explain certain crucial facts in the cross-examination and could not depose certain crucial issues in chief-examination.

(3.) On perusal of the affidavit of PW3 it shows that PW3 could not elicit certain crucial facts before the Court. It is unfold therefore to drive the Court it is just and necessary to re-examine.