High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32818 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36057 of 2024 Applicant :- Virendra And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lallan Prasad Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Rejoinder afÏdavit filed by the learned counsel for applicants in Court today is taken on record.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Mr. Rakesh Dubey, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party no.1 and Mr. Lallan Prasad, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party no.2. 3. Perused the record. 4. Applicants Virendra, Atirek, Sheetal Devi and Akanksha, who are charge-sheeted accused and facing trial before court below, have approached this Court by means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash impugned orders dated 28.06.2024 and 04.10.2024 passed by A.D.J.-I Kanpur Dehat in S.T. No.981/2021 (State Vs. Virendra and others) related to case crime no. 614/2020 under Section-323, 324, 307, 302 IPC registered at P.S. Rasoolabad, District-Kanpur Dehat and further direct the trial court to reconsider the application in the light of order passed by Hon'ble Court, otherwise the applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 5. Learned counsel for applicants submits that the order impugned in present application is manifestly illegal and arbitrary and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. 6. In furtherance of aforesaid submission, learned counsel for applicants contends that present case is a case of no-cross examination of Prosecution Witnesses Nos. 8 and 9. Admittedly, the trial before the court below is that of the accused-applicants. Therefore, the trial of the accused- applicants of necessity has to be a free and fair trial. Principles of natural justice demands that justice should not only be done but also seen to be done. During trial the accused has right to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. No amount of evidence can be looked into, unless the deposition of witnesses comes out unscratched from the furnace of cross examination of the prosecution. In the present case, the statement-in-chief alone of P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 shall be read against the accused-applicants, even though the applicants have been deprived of an opportunity to cross- examine the aforesaid witnesses. 7. To lend support to his aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for the applicants has invited the attention of the Court to the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Varsha Garg Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 896. He, therefore, submits that in view of above the order impugned is liable to be quashed and the present application be allowed. 8. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party no.1 and Mr. Lallan Prasad, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party no.2 have vehementally opposed the present applicant. They submit that in spite of sufÏcient opportunity having been granted to the accused-applicants to cross-examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9, no attempt was made on behalf of the accused-applicants to cross-examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9. Resultantly, the court below closed the right of the accused-applicants to cross-examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9. It is thus urged that in view of the conduct of the accused- applicants, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. However, they could not dislodge the legal and equitable submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicants with reference to the record at this stage. 9. Be that as it may, having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party no.1, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party no.2 and upon perusal of the record this Court finds that it is an admitted fact that no cross-examination of P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 has taken place at the behest of the accused- applicants. As suggested by the learned counsel for applicants that the trial before the court below is that of the accused-applicants and therefore, such trial should be a free and fair trial, this Court finds that since the statement in-chief of P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 is to be read against the accused- applicants, even though they have not been cross-examined on behalf of the present accused-applicants, as such, the orders impugned cannot be sustained and are liable to quashed. 10. In view of the discussions made above, this applicant succeeds and is liable to be allowed. It is accordingly allowed. The orders impugned dated 28th June, 2024 and 4th October, 2024 passed by the Additional District Judge-I Kanpur Dehat in S.T. No.981/2021 (State Vs. Virendra and others) arising out of case crime no. 614/2020 under Section- 323, 324, 307, 302 IPC registered at P.S. Rasoolabad, District- Kanpur Dehat shall stand quashed. 11. It is, however, provided that the applicants shall deposit Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. 10,000/-+ Rs. 10,000/-) by way of bank drafts drawn in favour of P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 respectively within a period of three weeks from today. Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount, the court below shall recall P.W.-8 and P.W.- 9 respectively. On recall and upon appearance of P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 the amount deposited by the accused-applicants before court below shall be remitted to P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 It is, however, provided that only one respectively. opportunity shall be available to the accused-applicants to cross-examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 under this order. However, in case for any reason, the accused-applicants fail to cross- examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9 in spite of their appearance before court below then the liberty granted to the accused- applicants under this order shall stand extinguished and no further opportunity shall be granted by court below to the accused-applicants to cross examine P.W.-8 and P.W.-9. It is also clarified that in case the applicants fail to deposit the amount as mentioned above within the time provided by this Court, the present application shall stand dismissed without further reference to this Court. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Sushil/- (Rajeev Misra, J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad