Madras High Court
Seenu @ Srinivasan vs State Represented By The on 4 March, 2021
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.R.C.No.122 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.2430 of 2021
Crl.R.C.No.124 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.2432 of 2021
Seenu @ Srinivasan ... Petitioner in both cases
Vs.
State represented by the
Inspector of Police,
CBCID (Counterfeit Currency Wing),
Coimbatore in Cr.No.3/2004. ... Respondent in both cases
PRAYER in Crl.R.C.No.122 of 2021: Criminal Revision Petition filed under
Sections 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for records of the
order dated 02.12.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.113 of 2019 in C.A.No.8 of 2013
on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode and set-aside
the same and allow the Criminal revision petition.
PRAYER in Crl.R.C.No.124 of 2021: Criminal Revision Petition filed under
Sections 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for records of the
order dated 02.12.2020 passed in Crl.M.P.No.112 of 2019 in C.A.No.8 of 2013
on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode and set-aside
the same and allow the Criminal revision petition.
In both cases:
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Selvakumar
For Respondent : Mr.K.Madhan
Government Advocate [Crl. Side]
*****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
COMMON ORDER
The respondent Police have registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2004
against the petitioner/A1 and six others for offence under Sections 120-B IPC
r/w 489A to D IPC all r/w 109 IPC. After completion of investigation, the
respondent Police have laid a charge sheet and the same was taken on file as
S.C.No.146 of 2008 by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode.
After completion of trial, the petitioner along with other accused were
convicted, by judgment, dated 04.02.2013, against which, the petitioner
preferred an appeal before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Erode in C.A.No.8 of 2013. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner
has filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.113 of 2019 in C.A.No.8 of 2013 under
Section 391 Cr.P.C., seeking to permit him to cross examine PW.3 and PW.13
in S.C.No.146 of 2008 and for which, he filed another petition in
Crl.M.P.No.112 of 2019 in C.A.No.8 of 2013 to reopen C.A.No.8 of 2013.
Both the petitions were dismissed on 02.12.2020 by the learned I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Erode. Challenging the same, the petitioner/A1 is
before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since PW.3
and PW.13 were not cross examined by the petitioner, he has filed two petitions
for reopen and recall and the same were dismissed by the lower appellate Court.
The learned counsel would further submit that no opportunity was given to the
petitioner for substantial justice and fair trial and hence one more opportunity
must be given to the petitioner. The fair trial to be concluded by giving fair
opportunity to cross examine the prosecution witnesses and to putforth his
defence through the prosecution witnesses during the cross examination. The
accused need not enter into the witness box and establish his defence and
disprove the case of the prosecution, he can prove his defence through cross
examination by preponderance of probability. Therefore, the failure of cross
examination of one of the witness would prejudice to the case of the defence.
The Court below failed to consider the fundamental criminal jurisprudence that
the accused should be given all opportunities up to his satisfaction to prove his
innocence. The prosecution has to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt
and the defence can be established even through the cross examination of the
prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the orders passed by the Court below is
liable to be set aside.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
3.Mr.K.Madhan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for
the respondent Police would submit that sufficient opportunity was given to the
defence counsel to cross examine the prosecution witnesses during trial.
Though the defence counsel cross examined the other witnesses adduced by the
prosecution, he purposefully failed to cross examine PW.3 alone. Eventhough
he sought permission to cross examine PW.3 and PW.13, subsequently PW.13
was recalled and cross examined and only PW.3 alone left. Despite giving
sufficient opportunity, the defence counsel failed to utilize the same. The lower
appellate Court, by considering all the materials, rightly dismissed the petition,
which need not be interfered with.
4.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing on behalf of the respondent Police
and perused the materials available on record.
5.It is not in dispute that the revisional jurisdiction of this Court is very
limited, however to ensure the substantial justice, the Court to give one more
opportunity to the defence counsel to cross examine the witnesses of the
prosecution. However, despite sufficient opportunity was given to the defence
counsel, he did not utilize the same. Therefore, the lower appellate Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
rightly dismissed the petitions. In order to give one more opportunity and to
ensure fair trial and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to allow the
criminal revisions.
6.In view of the above, the orders, dated 02.12.2020 in Crl.M.P.Nos.112
& 113 of 2019 in C.A.No.8 of 2013 passed by the learned I Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Erode, is set aside.
7.The petitioner alone is permitted to recall and cross examine PW.3.
Since the petitioner was already given sufficient opportunity and he failed to
utilize the same, so, he has to bare with cost. However, the respondent is a
State and the prosecution, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) to the credit of Corona Relief Fund on or
before 12.03.2021. After credit of the payment, the petitioner shall file the
receipt before the lower appellate Court on or before 15.03.2021. After
receiving the payment receipt, the learned I Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Erode/lower appellate court is directed to give only one opportunity to
the petitioner to cross examine PW.3 and complete the proceedings on or
before 31.03.2021 in the manner known to law, since only one witness is to be
cross examined.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
8.In the result, these Criminal Revisions are allowed with the above
directions. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
04.03.2021
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vv2
Note: Issue order copy on 05.03.2021.
To
1.The I Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Erode.
2.The Inspector of Police,
CBCID (Counterfeit Currency Wing),
Coimbatore.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
vv2
Crl.R.C.Nos.122 & 124 of 2021
04.03.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
