Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Kasi vs The State Rep. By
2021 Latest Caselaw 443 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 443 Mad
Judgement Date : 6 January, 2021

Madras High Court
Kasi vs The State Rep. By on 6 January, 2021
                                                                             Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED: 06.01.2021

                                                          CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

                                                Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020
                                                and CMP.No.7773 of 2020

                     Kasi,
                     S/o.Thoppula Gounder.                                      ... Petitioner.
                                                             Vs.

                     The State rep. by
                     Inspector of Police,
                     CBCID Police Station,
                     Tiruvannamalai.                                            ... Respondent.

                     Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call

                     for the records and set aside the docket order dated 07.10.2020, passed by

                     Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai in S.C.No.116 of

                     2010.

                                     For Petitioner      : Mr.B.Jawahar

                                     For Respondent      : Mr.C.Raghavan
                                                           Government Advocate (Crl.side)




                     Page No.1/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                              Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

                                                         ORDER

This petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Court

below dated 07.10.2020, wherein the Court below after allowing the

application filed by the petitioner to re-call P.W.46 and P.W.53, has

subsequently relied upon a circular issued by this Court and held that these

witnesses need not be cross examined since they are expert witnesses.

2.The petitioner is facing trial before the Court below for serious

charges. The prosecution had examined P.W.46 and P.W.53, who were

scientific experts and their reports were marked. These witnesses were not

cross examined on the same day since the counsel representing the

petitioner was indisposed. The petitioner filed an application to recall

P.W.46 and P.W.53 for cross examination. This application was allowed by

the Court below by an order dated 25.02.2020 and directed the petitioner to

pay the Batta. The petitioner also paid the Batta and process was issued to

these witnesses. In the meantime, due to pandemic situation, there was no

progress in the case and the Court suo motu passed an order on 07.10.2020

by relying upon a circular issued by this Court and had come to a conclusion

Page No.2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

that P.W.46 and P.W.53 need not be cross examined. Aggrieved by the

same, the present petition has been filed before this Court.

3.Heard Mr.B.Jawahar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner and Mr.C.Raghavan, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side),

appearing on behalf of the respondents.

4.In the considered view of this Court, the Court below having

allowed the application filed by the petitioner to re-call and cross examine

P.W.46 and P.W.53 and the petitioner also having paid the witness Batta,

ought not to have suo motu decided not to permit the petitioner to cross

examine P.W.46 and P.W.53. Even while passing the orders on 25.02.2020,

the Court below had taken into consideration the Division Bench Judgment

of this Court and also the scope of Section 393 Cr.P.C and thereafter

proceeded to allow the application. The procedure adopted by the Court

below to suo motu recall its earlier order and not permit the petitioner to

cross examine the witnesses, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The

prosecution having examined these witnesses, can be subjected to cross

examination, more particularly, when the accused person had been given an

Page No.3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

indefeasible right to fair trial.

5.In view of the above discussion, this Court has no hesitation to

interfere with the docket order passed by the Court below on 17.10.2020

and the same is hereby set aside. There shall be a direction to the Court

below to fix a date for the appearance of P.W.46 and P.W.53 and on the date

of their appearance, they shall be cross examined and it shall be completed

on the same date.

6.This Criminal Original Petition is accordingly allowed with the

above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

06.01.2021

Note:Upload order copy by 18.01.2021. Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No

rm

Page No.4/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

To

1.The Inspector of Police, CBCID Police Station, Tiruvannamalai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Page No.5/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.,

rm

Crl.O.P.No.19347 of 2020

06.01.2021

Page No.6/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter