Tropelo @ Mahim Majumder and another vs State of West Bengal

Joymalya Bagchi, J. - None appears for the State.

Mr. Suman De, learned Advocate, who usually appears on behalf of the State, is requested to appear on behalf of the State in this matter. A copy of the petition be served upon Mr. De in course of the day.

Order dated 09.09.2015 passed by learned Special Court, POCSO Court cum Second Additional District and Sessions Judge in Spt-88/2014 arising out of Ashokenagar Police Station Case No.50 of 2014 dated 23.01.2014 under Sections 363/342/376(2)(i)(j)/109 of the Indian Penal Code closing the prosecution evidence of the victim girl has been assailed.

Learned lawyer appearing for the petitioner submits that prayer was made for deferment of cross-examination of the victim girl till the completion of examination-in-chief of CSW Nos.2 and 3. It is submitted that the as said witnesses are the mother and sister respectively of the victim girl, immediate cross-examination of the victim girl may prejudice the defence of the petitioner.

I have considered the submission of the petitioner. I am of the opinion that the cross-examination of the victim girl is would not prejudice the defence of the case in any way inasmuch as the sister and mother being CSW Nos.2 and 3 are not eye-witnesses of the incident and are merely corroborative witnesses. Such prayer is nothing but and a desperate attempt to dilate the proceeding.

Furthermore, deferment of cross-examination of the victim girl particularly in a prosecution under POCSO Act is unwarranted as the scope and ambit of the said legislation is to ensure that the minor victim is not harassed by repeated attendance in Court proceedings for the purpose of recording evidence. In view of such fact I am not inclined to accede to the prayer for deferment of cross-examination of the minor victim.

However, I give last opportunity to the defence to cross-examine the said minor victim girl and accordingly, I direct that the Trial Court to fix a date for cross-examination of the said minor and further direct that such cross-examination shall be concluded on that day itself without granting any prayer for adjournment whatsoever.

In the event any prayer for adjournment is sought, the same shall be declined and the prosecution evidence shall be closed. Needless to mention cross-examination of the minor shall be conducted after adhering to all the precautionary measures as laid down in law.

With the aforesaid directions, the revision petition is disposed of.