Dharam Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Hon''ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi

It appears that the petitioner-accused had earlier preferred Revision Petition u/s 397 read with Section 401 of Cr. P.C. against the order dated 31.10.2011, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track) No. 1, Beawar, district Ajmer, (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Sessions Case No. 35/2010, whereby the trial court has rejected the application of the petitioner moved u/s 311 Cr. P.C. The said revision was permitted to be converted into the petition u/s 482 Cr. P.C. as per the order dated 21.8.2012, passed in the said Revision Petition. It has been submitted by learned counsel Mr. Dhakad, for the petitioner that the petitioner is facing the trial for the offences under Sections 450, 376, 363 and 366A I.P.C. and the prosecution had examined the complainant as P.W. 3 Kiran, in the said trial, however, the complainant having not given correct statement and had also filed an affidavit stating interalia that she had given the statement under pressure, the petitioner had filed an application u/s 311 of Cr. P.C. for recalling the complainant for her re-examination. According to the learned counsel, the said order passed by the trial court is illegal and the application of the petitioner u/s 311 Cr. P.C. is required to be allowed in the interest of fair trial.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and to the impugned order passed by the Court, it appears that the complainant has already been examined by the prosecution and cross-examined by the defence. The petitioner subsequently appears to have submitted the application u/s 311 Cr. P.C. for recalling the said complainant on the ground that she had given her evidence before the Court under pressure. As rightly observed by the trial court, whether the complainant had given her evidence under pressure or not, could not be decided at the stage of trial and it was not necessary for the Court to recall the complainant for re-examination. It can not be gainsaid that the powers u/s 311 Cr. P.C. should be exercised by the trial court in exceptional cases and only when the trial court finds it necessary for the just decision of the case. If the trial court has not thought it necessary, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said discretionary order. In that view of the matter, the petition being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.