Allahabad High Court
Sujeet Kumar Barnwal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home, ... on 23 August, 2022
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 852 of 2022
Revisionist :- Sujeet Kumar Barnwal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Suresh Chandra Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Suresh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist,, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Present criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 6.8.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge/F.T.C. IInd, Sultanpur, in S.T. No.140/2015, arising out of Case Crime No.16 of 2015, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, (State Vs. Shakuntal & Others) whereby the application U/s 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist for examining the P.W.-7, who was not cross examined by the defence, has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the revisionist contends that P.W.-7 namely Constable Umesh Pratap Singh was produced on 21.7.2022 before the trial court. On that date due to instruction of the Bar Association, counsel for the revisionist moved an application for giving another opportunity for cross examination. The examination in chief of the witness P.W.-7 was recorded and the application of the revisionist was rejected for giving another opportunity for cross examination. Without considering the fact that on that date there was special instruction of the Bar Association. He further submitted that P.W.-7 is only witness of police and there is necessity to confront the witness on the point of the improvement made by the prosecution witnesses in their statement, therefore, cross examination of the P.W.-7 is necessary on this point.
Therefore, revisionist moved an application U/S 311 Cr.P.C. to summon the P.W.-7 for cross examination. He further submitted that trial court dismissed the application of the revisionist vide impugned order dated 6.8.2022 without recording any reason of his own and without considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case that in this circumstances cross examination of the P.W.-7 is essential to the just decision of the case. He prays that one last opportunity may be given to the revisionist so that justice may be done.
Learned AGA opposes the prayer of learned counsel for the revisionist on the ground that the instant application is nothing but an attempt to delay the disposal of the case pending before the trial court
In view of above, the criminal revision succeeds and is allowed. The judgment and order of the trial court is set aside. The parties are directed to appear before the trial court after the date fixed in the trial court i.e. after 24.8.2022. Trial court is requested to fix a date on which the appellant shall produce the three witnesses, and the same may thereafter be examined expeditiously in accordance with law, without causing any further delay. Needless to say that the prosecution will be entitled to cross examine them.
After hearing the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. and after perusing the material on record, this Court is of the opinion that one last opportunity needs to be given to the revisionist.
Accordingly, the order dated 6.8.2022 is set aside with a direction to the learned trial court to give one last opportunity to the revisionist to cross examine P.W-7 by fixing a date The parties are directed to appear before the trial court on the date fixed in trial court after 24.8.2022.
Learned counsel for the revisionist undertakes that the revisionist shall cross examine the said witness on the date fixed itself and undertakes that no adjournment will be sought by the revisionist and in case this last opportunity is not availed by the revisionist, no further opportunity will be given.
Order Date :- 23.8.2022
Md Faisal
