Allahabad High Court
Satendra And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:191048
Court No. - 89
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32992 of 2023
Applicant :- Satendra And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh Khokher
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 19.08.2023 passed in S.T. No. 577 of 2016 (State Vs. Satendra and others) arising out of Case Crime No.128 of 2016 under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. T.P. Nagar, District Meerut and recall the persecution witnesses P.W. 1 Ranveer Singh, P.W. 2 Jaiveer Singh for further cross examination.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that applicants, who are accused in the case have moved application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to re-examine the witnesses P.W. 1 Ranveer Singh and P.W. 2 Jaiveer Singh with some specific question made in the application which could not be examined at the time of trial. Counsel for the applicant has placed reliance over the judgement passed by the Hon. Apex Court in Varsha Garg Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others 2022 Live Law (SC) 662. Counsel for the applicants further submits that order passed by the trial court dismissing the application of the applicants under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is non application of mind and an abuse of the process of the court and is liable to be set aside.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by the counsel for the applicants and submits that order passed by the trial court is just and proper and at this stage, no interference is warranted.
5. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the parties and perused the record. The trial court rejected the application of applicants on the ground that accused/applicants have already examined P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 and have put all the questions during examination and cross objections and queries which have been raised in the application here and application for re-examination of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 has been moved after five years to delay the proceedings. From the record, it appears that prosecution witnesses are being examined. The Hon. Apex Court in his judgment Varsha Garg (supra) stated that any court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person as witness or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness or recall and re-examine any person already examined. The question which is material for just decision of the case, must be required to be examined is not in the shape to fill up lacuna and is material witness and in view of that, order passed on 19.08.2023 is set aside.
6. The trial court shall summon P.W. 1 Ranveer Singh and P.W. 2 Jaiveer Singh for re-examination by applicants/accused with cost of Rs.20,000/-. Rs.10,000/- shall be paid to each witnesses. The applicants shall deposit Rs.20,000/- within a period of ten days thereafter the trial court within fifteen days shall summon the P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 and fix a date for re-examination. If the applicants do not examine P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 on the date fixed, the court shall proceed in accordance with law. On failure of deposition of Rs.20,000/- within ten days, the direction issued by this Court shall have no effect.
7. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application is disposed of with the above observation.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023
Meenu Singh
