Amit Kumar Roy v. The State of Jharkhand

: Mr. Vishal Kr. Binay, Advocate : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT Order No.05/14.02.2025 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 08.08.2022 passed in G.R. Case No.1141 of 2014, Kotwali P.S. Case No.189 of 2014 by Sri Aishwarya Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class XVI, Ranchi by which the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C for recalling the evidence of Informant - O.P. No.2 has been hereby rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the Opposite party No.2. It is further submitted that one-time settlement has been made between the petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 for an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rs. Eight Lakh) towards permanent alimony and the said amount has also been paid to the Opposite Party No.2 by the petitioner. It is submitted that divorce has already been taken place by way of mutual 1 consent under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act vide judgment and decree dated 31.03.2023 and 13.04.2023 respectively passed by the learned Additional Family Court, Ranchi. Hence in the interest of justice, impugned order dated 08.08.2022 passed by the learned Court below may be set aside and the petitioner may be permitted to examine the Opposite Party No.2 on recall.

Photo Copies of certified copy of the Judgment and Decree dated 31st March 2023 and 13th April 2023 respectively passed in Original Suit (M.T.S) No.259 of 2022 by Mrs. Sanjeeta Srivastava, Addl. Principal Judge, Addl. Family Court-I, Ranchi have been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner during argument of this case, let it be kept on record. 4.

Learned counsel for the State raised no objection. Learned counsel the Opposite party No.2 (i.e. the Informant) raised no objection. It is further submitted that he has no objection if the petitioner is allowed to examine the informant/Opposite Party No.2.

It is submitted that the Opposite Party No.2 has received Rs.8,00,000/- (Rs.Eight Lakh) by way of one time settlement towards permanent alimony.

At this stage, it is relevant to refer Section 311 Cr.P.C which reads as follows:-

Section-311:- Power to summon material witness, or examine person present.- Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined; and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if 2 his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case.

Although, the first part of the provision of Section 311 Cr.P.C convers discretion to the learned Court below to summon and examine any witness at any stage of trial but the second part of the provision under Section 311 of Cr.P.C mandates the Court to summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case. Thus, said part of Section 311 of Cr.P.C is mandatory in nature.

With the consent of both the sides and considering the facts and circumstances of this case that this is a case of matrimonial dispute and the divorce has already been effected between the petitioner and the Opposite Party No.2 vide judgement dated 31st March 2023 and decree dated 13.04.2023 in Original Suit (M.T.S) No.259 of 2022 by Mrs. Sanjeeta Srivastava, Additional Principal Judge, Addl. Family Court-I, Ranchi and also considering the fact that the petitioner has paid Rs.8,00,000/- (Rs. Eight Lakhs) to the Informant – Opp. Party No.2 by way of one time settlement the impugned order dated

08.08.2022 passed in G.R. Case No.1141 of 2014 Kotwali P.S. No.189 of 2014 is set aside. The learned Court below i.e. the Court of Sri Aishwarya Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Calss XVI, Ranchi or his Successor Court is directed to permit the petitioner cross-examine the O.P. No.2 on the point of compromise on recall and for any other aspects and permit the parties to file the necessary documents.

Thus, this Criminal Revision Application No.34 of 2023 is allowed in terms of compromise. 3

The learned Court below is directed to permit the petitioner to examine the Opposite party No.2 on recall for her further cross-examination on the next date fixed in this case.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below at once by the Office by FAX. Nishant/- N.A.F.R (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 4