The High Court · 2025

1 Chatilla Srinath,, S/o Sudhakar, Age 24 Years, Occu. Student, R/o. Julylvada, Hanamkonda

2. I\ilood Sunil , S/o. Sammaiah, Age. 24 Yearc, Occu Student, R/o Jawaharnagar, [Vlachapur(v), Venkatapur, Jayashankar Distr.

3. Gopu Bharath,, S/o Dhanunjayah, Age 24 Years, Occu. Student, R/o. Ponnuguda Village Kothagudem tVlandal and Drst.

4. E.Eashwar,, S/o-Ram Chander, Age. 67 Years, Occu. Coolie, R/o. H.No.16- 10-38, Shivanagar, Warangal district PETITIONER/ACCUSED No. 1TO 4 AND 'l . The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana

2. B.Ravinder,, Sub lnspector of Police, PS Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda City and District. ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the crrcumstances stated In the Memorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petttron, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the docket order dated 21 08.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.50'1 of 2025 in S.C.(NDPS). No.'105 of 2022 on the file of Specral Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases Under NDPS Act-cum- I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda District, at Hanumakonda This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lilemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V Venkat Ram Narsaiah ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana, on behalf of the Respondent No.1 The Court made the following: ORDER I I I i I i i I I HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DE\/ EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11637 ot 2025 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Secti ; r 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for sl r rt 'BNSS') by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 seeking to set r;ide the order passed in Crl.M P No.501 of 2025 in S.C.(NDPS) | r 105 ot 2022, dated 21.08.2025 on the file of the learned Sp=;al Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases Under NDPS Act-cr r r-l Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda Di trict, for the offences under Section 31 1 of Cr.P.C. 2 Heard Sri Venkat Ram Narsaiah, learned r:r unsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, lea red Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Nc -State 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners subrr ted that the petitioners are the accused in SC NDPS 105 of 20t I and that the petition was filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C ;eeking recall of PW1 and PW2. However, the trial Court dismisr;, d the petition without assigning any reasons. He further subr!^ tted that the accused must be given an opportunity to cross examine the i I I 2 ETD, J Crl.P 11637 2025 witnesses, failing which they would be deprived of their legitimate rights. Hence, he prayed the Court to set aside the order in Crl.lt/.P.No.501 of 2025 in S.C.(NDPS).No.105 ot 2022. dated

21.08.2025

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submrtted that the prosecution witnesses were already cross-examined by the learned counsel for accused Nos. 2 to 4; however, the learned counsel for accused No. 'l did not cross-examine the witnesses Therefore, he prayed to pass appropriate orders

5. Perused the record. lt reveals that PW.1 and 2 were cross- examined by learned counsel for accused Nos.2 to 4 but cross- examination of these witnesses was not done by the learned counsel for accused No.'l on the said date, learned counsel for accused No.1 was called absent and hence cross-examination of PW.1 and 2 by the counsel for accused No.1 was recorded as nil The impugned order dated 21 .08.2025 reads as follows: "Heard both s/des, ln fhls case l/O LW10ls presenl and examined as PWS. Though the Counsel for accused No.7 examined PWs but he did not bring to the notice of the Couft about this petition for the recall of evidence of PW1 and PW2. Only l/O is examined in this case and the PW1 examination rb c/osed At this stage, this Coutt is not inclined to allow this petition to recall PW1 and PW2 for cross examination by accused No.1. Thought the petttion is filed prior to examining the investigating officer/PWs. ( ( 3 ETD, J :rl.P 11637 2025 ln view of the above circumstances, this petition is dit t ,rssed'1 6 lt is pertinent to note that the petition was fi E 1 prior to the examination of the lnvestigating Officer as PW5, ut the same was not considered. Therefore, in the interest of jus 1 ce, PWI and PW2 should be recalled and cross-examined b y the learned counsel for accused No.'l . ln this context, it is perti r rnt to refer to the decision of the Apex Court relied upon by the lez rned counsel for the petitioners in Rajaram Prasad Yadav v. !i', ate of Bihar and another 1, wherein relevant paragraphs held ar; 'ollows: n) The power under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. must ther : be invokecl by the CoutT only in order to meet the ends of justice t. strong and ' valid reason and the same must be exercised with a ve, caution and circumspection, The Court should bear in minc lat fair triat entails the interest of the accused, the victim and the ociety and. therefore, the grant of fair and proper opponunities ft, he persons concerned, must be ensured being a constitutional gce . as well as a human right".

7. Therefore, in light of the aforementioned discr- ision and relying upon the cited decision, the order 3 tssed in Crl IVI.P No.501 of 2025 in S.C.(NDPS) No.105 of 2(22, dated 2i.08.2025, on the file of the learned Special Sess r ns Judge for Trial of Cases under the NDPS Act-cum-l Additic r al District 'AIR 2013 Supreme Court Cases 3081 i I I I I 4 ETD, J Crl.P I1637 2025 and Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda District, is hereby set aside. The petition is allowed and the trial Court is directed to fix a date for the cross-examination of PW1 and PW2. The counsel for accused No.1 shall remain present on the said date and shall cross-examine PW'l and PW2 without fail 7 . Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed B. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- C. DEEPIKA TANT REGISTRAR TION OFFICER To

1. The Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases Under NDPS Act-cum- | Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda Drstrict, at Hanumakonda Comm issionerate-

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Hanamkonda, Warangal 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad 4. One CC to Sri. V Venkat Ram Narsaiah, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies (our) HIGH COURT DATED:2610912025 .a- " Ir: -]:-. (i\ 05 [aI ZW i , )r'" -- ttJ,,:i '\.----.,.--,- _,--,-- ,, :,,, /r,, ll,, i, r:. r\ f, \\'i \ ORDER CRLP.No.11637 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED q \