Ashique Ansari v. The State of Jharkhand

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioners For the State : Mr. Rahul Kr. Pandey, Advocate : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P. ….. By the Court:-

Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the order dated 25.03.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No. 43 of 2021 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra by which the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra dismissed the criminal revision challenging the order dated 16.07.2019 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Chatra in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 77 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 647 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 295A of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 11 (1) (a)(d)/(2) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 2 Cr.M.P. No.4332 of 2022

The brief fact of the case is that the petitioners who were the accused persons of the said case were on bail. The case was fixed on 16.07.2019 for recording of evidence. Witnesses were present. The petitioners were represented by their Advocate under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. After the examination-in-chief of the witnesses were concluded, the defence counsel refused to cross-examine the witnesses and the learned S.D.J.M., Chatra cancelled the bail granted to the petitioners and directed the office clerk to issue non-baiable warrant of arrest against them.

The petitioners filed Criminal Revision No. 43 of 2021 before the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra and the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra observed that the learned trial court has rightly cancelled the bail under the facts of the case and dismissed the criminal revision.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned trial court without any rhyme or reason rejected the prayer of revision of the petitioners by their Advocate under Section 317 Cr.P.C. by a non-speaking order and therefore, the same is not sustainable in law. Hence, the same be set aside.

Learned Special Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the order dated 25.03.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No. 43 of 2021 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra and also the order dated 16.07.2019 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Chatra in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 77 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 647 of 2015. 3 Cr.M.P. No.4332 of 2022

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that an accused had a right not to cross-examine the witness. The accused cannot be compelled to cross-examine any witness if he does not want to cross-examine him. So, merely because the counsel who was representing the accused refused to cross- examine the witness on the instruction of his client being the petitioners who are the accused persons of this case, the same does not amount to any misconduct.

Under such circumstances, the learned trial court was expected to discharge the witnesses by mentioning in the deposition that cross-examination of the witnesses is declined by the accused persons but certainly, there was no reason for rejecting the prayer of the accused persons of the case, for the trial being proceeded in absence of them.

Accordingly, the order dated 25.03.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No. 43 of 2021 by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra and also the order dated 16.07.2019 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Chatra in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 77 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 647 of 2015 are not sustainable in law. Accordingly the same are set aside.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners will surrender before the learned court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order in the learned trial court. 4 Cr.M.P. No.4332 of 2022

In case, the petitioners surrender before the learned trial court within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and prays for regular bail, the learned trial court is directed to admit the petitioners on bail upon their furnishing fresh bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties with the condition that they will cooperate with the trial.

In case, the petitioners fail to appear before the learned trial court within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order by the learned trial court, the learned trial court is directed to take all coercive steps for apprehension of the petitioners for facing the trial.