AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 272 wordsS.S. Mishra, J
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.02.2024 passed by the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Kendrapara in connection with G.R. Case No.73 of 2023 whereby his application under Section-311 Cr.P.C. to recall P.Ws. 1, 2 & 3 has been turned down.
It appears from the record that the petitioner was afforded opportunity to cross-examine the said witnesses. However, the defence counsel was not ready on that day. Therefore, the evidence was closed.
Taking into consideration the averments made in the application and the fact that the petitioner was not afforded adequate opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, I am inclined to allow the application under Section-311 Cr.P.C.
However, in so far as P.W.2-Rekha Sethi is concerned, she is the victim in the present case. She cannot be repeatedly called for cross-examination, in view of the bar contained under Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act. Therefore, the application vis-à-vis P.W.2 is rejected. In so far as P.Ws.1 & 3 are concerned, the learned trial Court is directed to afford a single opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine these witnesses. The petitioner is also directed to furnish the relevant questionnaires to be put to the said witnesses and the trial Court would examine the relevancy of those questions to be put to P.Ws. 1 & 3 and afford a single opportunity to the petitioner for cross-examining these two witnesses.
It is made clear that, no adjournment shall be granted to the petitioner for the purpose of cross-examination of the witnesses, i.e. P.Ws. 1 & 3.
The CRLMC is accordingly allowed.
………………………….