Kamal Kishor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 6560 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Kamal Kishor vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 May, 2025

           NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25062




                                                              1                            MCRC-51396-2024
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 51396 of 2024
                                                   KAMAL KISHOR
                                                      Versus
                                     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                            Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari - Advocate for petitioner.
                            Shri V.K. Pandey - Dy. Government Advocate for respondent/State.

                                                    Reserved on      : 09.05.2025
                                                     Pronounced on : 26.05.2025
                          ____________________________________________________________________________
                                                                  ORDER

This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 18.11.2024, passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Multai, District Betul in S.T. No.70/2020, whereby the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C moved by the applicant/accused for recalling prosecutrix (PW-1) only for exhibiting photographs and WhatsApp chat, was rejected by the trial Court.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in this case, prosecutrix was examined and re-examined. In paragraphs 10 and 11, she was cross- examined about the photographs and WhatsApp chat and she had admitted the said photographs and WhatsApp chat. It is further submitted that during her cross-examination, photographs and WhatsApp chat have not been marked, therefore, those documents could not be read at the time of passing

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25062

2 MCRC-51396-2024 of the judgment. It is further submitted that he is not delaying the trial. After rejection of application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., prosecution has also filed applications under Sections 91 and 311 of Cr.P.C. which have been allowed by order dated 11.05.2023. It is further submitted that accused should also be given proper opportunity for adducing evidence in support of his defence. In this regard, he has placed reliance upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Rattiram and Ors. Vs. State of M.P. through Inspector of Police, AIR 2012 SC 1485 . Aggrieved by the impugned order, petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

3. Learned counsel for the State have submitted that in this case, petitioner is facing trial under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l)/6 of POCSO Act. Allegation against the petitioner is that he took

the minor prosecutrix from her house without permission of her parents and committed rape her. Detailed cross-examination of prosecutrix on behalf of petitioner has already been done. In paragraphs 11, 12 and 13, corss- examination has been conducted regarding her conduct, photographs, mobile phone and relation with other persons etc. It is further submitted that the documents, which are intended to be exhibited, are the photocopies of documents and they will disclose the obscenity against dignity of victim and will also disclose her identity. It is further submitted that proviso of Section 146 of Indian Evidence Act and Section 33(6) of POCSO Act, 2012 prohibits putting such questions in the cross-examination of victim. Section 15 of POCSO Act, 2012 also make prohibition of such photographs and it is punishable act. Section 33(5) of POCSO Act, 2012 provides that child

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25062

3 MCRC-51396-2024 should not be called repeatedly to testify in the Court. It is further submitted that learned trial Court has rightly rejected the application of petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

5. From perusal of record, it is found that allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed rape with the minor prosecutrix. In paragraphs 11, 12 and 13, corss-examination has been conducted regarding her conduct, photographs, mobile phone and relation with other persons etc. whereas proviso of Section 146 of Indian Evidence Act and 33(6) of POCSO Act, 2012 prohibits putting such questions in the cross-examination of victim. Sections 15 of POCSO Act, 2012 also make prohibition of such photographs and it is punishable act. Section 33(5) of POCSO Act, 2012 provides that child should not be called repeatedly to testify in the Court. After considering all these aspects, learned trial Court has rightly rejected the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.

6. In view of above, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court.

7. Accordingly, present petition filed by petitioner is hereby dismissed.

(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL) V. JUDGE

Sateesh