Punjab-Haryana High Court
Riya Batra vs State Of Haryana And Others on 3 March, 2022
CRR No.1627 of 2021 {1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
208 CRR No.1627 of 2021
Judgment reserved on 04.02.2022
Pronounced on :03.03.2022
Riya Batra ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others ... Respondents
CRR No.1632 of 2021
Riya Batra ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Ms. Kajal Saini, Advocate
for the petitioner in both cases.
Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, AAG, Haryana
for respondent No.1.
Mr. Dhruv Gupta, Advocate
for respondents No.2 to 7 in CRR No.1627 of 2021 and
for respondent No.2 in CRR No.1632 of 2021.
SUVIR SEHGAL J.
This order shall dispose of two petitions, CRR No.1627 of
2021 titled as 'Riya Batra Vs. State of Haryana and others' and CRR
No.1632 of 2021 titled as 'Riya Batra Vs. State of Haryana and another', as
both the petitions have been instituted under Section 397 read with Section
401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity hereinafter
referred to as "the Code"), impugning orders dated 08.11.2021, whereby,
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRR-1627-2021 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
1 of 5
CRR No.1627 of 2021 {2}
applications under Section 311 of the Code, seeking recall of the prosecutrix
for her re-examination, have been dismissed.
Factual background leading to the filing of the petitions is that
FIR No.75 dated 03.09.2016 has been registered under Sections 3, 4, 7, 8 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 294,
328, 506, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at P.S.Women Ambala
(Annexure P-1) on the statement of a 17 years old girl (for short "the
prosecutrix") on the allegation that she is a student of 10th class and in April
2014, she came in contact with Raghav, who is married and works in the
electricity office. He asked her to be friends with him and on that pretext
called her to his house, when he was alone, served her a cold drink and
thereafter, she became unconscious and when she came to her senses, she
found herself unclothed. On asking, she was told that he had made physical
relations with her and promised to marry her. When she reacted, he
threatened to release her video, which he had recorded and threatened to kill
her. Few days later, Raghav introduced her to his colleague, Naresh, who
sweet talked her and told her that he wants to marry her. Naresh called her
to a temple, had a farcical wedding with her and brought her to Raghav's
house, where he told her to have physical relations with him. Raghav and
Naresh blackmailed her on the basis of recorded video and asked her to
develop relations with Sandeep, who molested her and later dropped her at
her home. Few days later, he forced her to get into relationship with Sahil,
Vimal and Madan Lal, who continued to physically harass her. On
31.08.2016, at the behest of Madan Lal, she went with Lucky, who forcibly
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRR-1627-2021 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
2 of 5
CRR No.1627 of 2021 {3}
took her into his car during the night to some fields, where he raped her and
left her with his two friends. She has given the mobile number of Lucky and
requested that action be taken against the accused. Her statement was
recorded in the presence of a member of CWC Ambala, she was produced
before the Magistrate and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C was
recorded and she was medically examined. On the basis of allegations
levelled by her, some accused were arrested and charged for offences under
IPC and POCSO Act. During the course of proceedings before the Trial
Court, she filed an application dated 25.08.2021 (Annexure P-3) for
recalling herself for re-examination, which after contest by the accused, has
been dismissed, vide order impugned herein.
I have heard counsel for the parties and examined the impugned
order as well as the documents placed on the record with their able
assistance.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swapan Kumar Chatterjee Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation (2019) 14 SCC 328 has observed as
under:-
"11. It is well settled that the power conferred under
Section 311 should be invoked by the Court only to meet the
ends of justice. The power is to be exercised only for strong
and valid reasons and it should be exercised with great caution
and circumspection. The Court has wide power under this
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRR-1627-2021 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
3 of 5
CRR No.1627 of 2021 {4}
Section to even recall witnesses for re-examination or further
examination, necessary in the interest of justice, but the same
has to be exercised after taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of each case. The power under this provision
shall not be exercised if the Court is of the view that the
application has been filed as an abuse of the process of law."
Following the said judgment, Supreme Court in V.N.Patil Vs.
K.Niranjan Kumar and others (2021) 3 SCC 661 held as under:-
"17. The aim of every Court is to discover the truth. Section
311 Cr.P.C. is one of many such provisions which strengthen
the arms of a court in its effort to unearth the truth by
procedure sanctioned by law. At the same time, the
discretionary power vested under Section 311 Cr.PC. has to be
exercised judiciously for strong and valid reasons and with
caution and circumspection to meet the ends of justice."
In the case in hand, although it has been vehemently urged that
the prosecutrix was a minor, when her testimony was recorded by the Trial
Court, but this star argument of the petitioner is found to be far from the
truth. In her examination-in-chief recorded on 27.11.2017 (at page 36 of the
paper book), the prosecutrix has given her date of birth as 14.09.1999 and
produced her birth certificate, which has been exhibited as Ex.P3. She has
been extensively cross-examined separately by the defence counsel for all
the accused spread over five hearings and she has been throughout
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRR-1627-2021 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
4 of 5
CRR No.1627 of 2021 {5}
consistent in her statement. There is nothing on the record to show that at
the time, her examination was recorded and till the time she moved the
application under Section 311 of the Code in August 2021, seeking her re-
examination, there has been any pressure or threat to her. It deserves to be
noticed that on the basis of her deposition recorded in the year 2017, an
application under Section 319 of the Code, was filed and two co-accused,
namely, Vimal and a juvenile were summoned as an additional accused and
are facing trial. The examination-in-chief was recorded after they were
summoned. Record shows that prosecution evidence has been closed on
25.02.2019 and the case is at the stage of defence evidence and arguments.
Now at this stage, prayer to recall the prosecutrix, already examined more
than 04 years earlier is nothing, but an attempt to delay the trial and the
Court has no inhibition in holding that the application is an abuse of process
of law.
Finding no merit in both the petitions, same are dismissed with
no order as to costs.
(SUVIR SEHGAL)
JUDGE
March 03, 2022
savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable Yes
For Subsequent orders see IOIN-CRR-1627-2021 Decided by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
5 of 5
