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
19 paragraphs · 278 words@GMENTTAG-JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
CRL.M.C. 1547/2018 & Crl.M.A.5616/2018(direction)
1.The petitioner impugns order dated 23.08.2017, whereby application of the petitioner under section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
(Cr.P.C.) seeking to recall of PW â€" 3 was declined though it was allowed qua PW â€" 2 & 4.
2.Right to cross-examine said witness was closed on 24.11.2016 as the petitioner did not avail of the said opportunity.
3.It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the right to cross-examine was closed qua PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4, however, by the
said application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., opportunity was granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-2 & PW-4 as the Court has noticed that
the petitioner accused was not represented by counsel.
4.Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that insofar as PW-3 is concerned, though the order-sheet records the presence of the counsel on
24.11.2016 when the right was closed, however on the very same date, counsel was freshly engaged and Vakalatnama was filed, which is
evidenced from the order itself.
5.It is submitted that PW-2 has been cross-examined and PW-4 is scheduled to be cross-examined on 18.05.2018. He prays that one opportunity
be granted subject to terms.
6.Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, subject to payment of costs of Rs.7,500/- to
be paid to the Delhi High Court Advocates Welfare Trust within a period of two weeks from today. On 18.05.2018, the Trial Court shall fix an
appropriate date for cross examination of PW â€" 3.
7.The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
8.Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.