Madras High Court
Salaparai Mani @ Mani vs State Rep. By on 7 June, 2022
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
1. Salaparai Mani @ Mani,
S/o. Chinnasami
2. Sekar @ Gnanasundaram,
S/o. Kandan
3. Selva @ Selvakumar,
S/o. Kuppan
4. Ramakrishnan,
S/o. Ramasami ... Petitioners
Versus
State rep. by
Inspector of Police,
Yercaud Police Station,
Salem Dt.
(Crime No.53 of 2016) ... Respondent
Page No.1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the dismissal order in C.M.P.No.34 of
2020 in S.C.No. 30 of 2017 passed on 01.02.2020 by the I Addl. Assistant
Sessions Judge, Salem.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vasudevan
For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan,
Addl. Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The challenge is made against the order passed by learned I Addl.
Asst. Sessions Judge, Salem dismissing the petition filed seeking for
recalling the prosecution witnesses viz., P.Ws.1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 12 for
cross-examination.
2. The learned Judge taking note of the fact that P.W.1 to 3 were
examined on 28.03.2018, P.W.4 and P.W.5 were examined on 29.11.2018,
P.W.6 was examined on 31.01.2019, P.W.8 was examined on 22.08.2019,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
P.W.9 and P.W.10 were examined on 14.11.2019, and P.W.11 and P.W.12
were examined on 30.01.2020 in chief examination, and despite
examination-in-chief, the petitioners/accused have not availed the
opportunity of cross-examination. Taking note of the conduct and
inadequacy in the process, the learned trial judge has dismissed the petition.
The same was put into challenge before this Court.
3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioners would submit that
fair opportunity to be given to cross-examine all the witnesses, since the
offence alleged against the petitioners are grave in nature.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for petitioner and the learned
Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent and perused the records.
5. At the outset, this Court is unable to countenance the submissions
made by the learned counsel that fair opportunity was not given. It is
relevant to note that as rightly noted by trial court, it has started examining
witnesses from the year 2018 till 2020. Though the sessions trial to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
conducted in a day-to-day basis, in fact, the trial court was also liberal in
granting such adjournments and conducted trial in a peacemeal manner.
Such a practice of conducting trial like magisterial trial is highly deprecated
by this Court in many cases. Despite such orders, the cases are still kept by
the trial court in the same manner, which is highly deprecated.
6. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that once the
chief examination is over, the cross-examination has to be conducted on the
same day. In the event of cross-examination could not be completed on the
same day, it can be carried away to the next day and the matter cannot be
protracted endlessly under the pretext of deferring cross-examination. Such
postponements or adjournments or deferment of sessions trial is contrary to
Sec.309 I.P.C. Therefore, the contention of learned counsel that fair
opportunity was not given has no legs to stand. However, considering the
fact that the accused was charged for the fair trial including Sec.395 r/w 397
I.P.C., and the witnesses are examined-in-chief and though the petition for
recall was dismissed, still the matter is not disposed of. Taking into
consideration the above fact, a final chance has been granted to the
petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses viz., P.W.s 1,2,4,6,7,8,11 and 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
as requested by the learned counsel subject to payment of costs of
Rs.25,000/- payable to the Chief Justice Relief Fund within a week from the
date of copy of this order. The receipt for payment of costs shall be
produced before the trial court and on such production of receipt, the trial
court shall examine the witnesses, particularly, P.Ws. 1,2,4,6,7,8,11 and 12
for the hearing dates on 4th and 5th July 2022. The cross-examination of the
above witnesses shall be completed within a period of two days and no
further adjournment need be given. It is also made it clear that due to
passage of time, any contra evidence in the form of witnesses resiling from
chief examination come on record in the form of cross-examination, the
same shall be taken note of by the trial court in the light of judgment of
Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab
[2015 (1) MLJ (Crl.) 288 SC] and thereafter, dispose of the matter on
merits within a period of three weeks. With the above direction, this
Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.
07.06.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
rpp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
To
1. The Superintendent of Police,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Ooty, The Nilgiris Dt.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Gudalur, The Nilgiris Dt.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Gudalur,
The Nilgiris Dt.
4. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
rpp
CRL.O.P.No.10473 of 2022
07.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
