9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 1178 - SC - Indian LawsWhether the Respondent turned hostile under coercion of accused person, can seek an application for re- examination U/s 313 Crpc after five months of his examination in trial court - The trial Court disallowed the applications of the Respondents filed u/s 311 of the Crpc, to re-examine PW-9, the informant. The High Court directed the trial Court to allow the 2nd Respondent to examine himself as a witness on a specified date by its order dated 9.12.2010. HELD THAT - The appeal, therefore, succeeds. The order impugned dated 9.12.2010, passed by the High Court is set aside. The order of the trial Court stands restored. The trial Court shall proceed with the trial. The stay granted by this Court in the order dated 7.3.2011, stands vacated. The trial Court shall proceed with the trial from the stage it was left and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The permission of the Court u/s 311 Code of Crpc for his re-examination by merely alleging that on the earlier occasion he turned hostile under coercion and threat meted out to him at the instance of the Appellant and other accused. It was quite apparent that the complaint, which emanated at the instance of the Appellant based on the subsequent incident, which resulted in the registration of the FIR, seem to have weighed with the second Respondent to come forward with the present application u/s 311 Crpc, by way of an afterthought. If really there was a threat to his life at the instance of the Appellant and the other accused, as rightly noted by the Court below, it was not known as to why there was no immediate reference to such coercion and undue influence meted out against him at the instance of the Appellant, when he had every opportunity to mention the same to the learned trial Judge or to the police officers or to any prosecution agency.
Issues Involved:
1. Legitimacy of the High Court's order allowing re-examination of PW-9 under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). 2. Applicability and interpretation of Section 311 CrPC and Section 138 of the Evidence Act. 3. Examination of the trial court's decision to disallow the re-examination of PW-9. Detailed Analysis: Legitimacy of the High Court's Order Allowing Re-examination of PW-9: The Supreme Court analyzed the High Court's order, which directed the trial court to allow the re-examination of PW-9 (the second Respondent). The High Court's decision was questioned on the grounds that it was passed without the presence of the Appellant and lacked detailed reasoning. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's order did not address the issues considered by the trial court, which had previously rejected the re-examination request after thorough examination. Applicability and Interpretation of Section 311 CrPC and Section 138 of the Evidence Act: The Supreme Court emphasized the broad discretionary powers vested in courts under Section 311 CrPC, which allows summoning or recalling witnesses at any stage if their evidence is essential for a just decision. The Court referred to several precedents, including: - Jamatraj Kewalji Govani v. State of Maharashtra: Highlighted the duty of the court to summon witnesses if it aids a just decision. - Mohanlal Shamji Soni v. Union of India: Stressed the importance of finding the truth and rendering a just decision. - Raj Deo Sharma (II) v. State of Bihar: Reiterated the court's duty to summon and examine witnesses essential for a just decision. - U.T. Of Dadra and Nagar Haveli v. Fatehsinh Mohansinh Chauhan: Clarified that summoning or re-examining witnesses should not be seen as filling lacunae unless it causes serious prejudice to the accused. The Court noted that Section 138 of the Evidence Act prescribes the order of examination, cross-examination, and re-examination of witnesses, which must align with the objectives of Section 311 CrPC. Examination of the Trial Court's Decision to Disallow Re-examination of PW-9: The trial court disallowed the re-examination of PW-9, noting that his initial testimony did not support the prosecution's case and that there was no immediate complaint of coercion or threat from the accused. The trial court observed that PW-9's application for re-examination was filed much later, raising suspicions of an afterthought influenced by subsequent events. The Supreme Court found the trial court's reasoning appropriate and just, emphasizing that the application for re-examination lacked bona fides. The Court highlighted that PW-9 did not report any coercion at the time of his initial testimony or immediately thereafter, undermining the credibility of his later claims. Conclusion: The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court's order allowing re-examination of PW-9 was unwarranted and set it aside. The trial court's decision to disallow the re-examination was restored. The trial court was directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously, ensuring a fair trial in line with the principles of justice. Final Order: The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order dated 9.12.2010 was set aside, and the trial court's order was restored. The trial court was instructed to proceed with the trial and conclude it within three months.
|
