Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinod Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 20 November, 2023
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450
CRM-M-58527-2023 1 2023:PHHC:147450
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
134 CRM-M-58527-2023
Date of Decision: 20.11.2023
Vinod Kumar ......... Pe oner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:- Mr. Parunjeet Singh, Advocate for the pe oner.
Ms. Swa Batra, D.A.G., Punjab. (Through video conferencing).
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)
FIR No. Dated Police Sta1on Sec1ons 3 12.05.2017 Vigilance Bureau, 420, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259,
District Ludhiana 467, 468, 471, IPC and 7, 13(2) of Preven on of Corrup on Act, 1988
1. Aggrieved by dismissal of the applica on under Sec on 311 Cr.P.C to recall two prosecu on witnesses i.e. PW-3 and PW-7, the accused has come up before this Court by filing the present pe on under Sec on 482 Cr.P.C.
2. No ce served upon the official respondent through the State's counsel. No ground to issue no ce to respondent No. 2 is made out. However, State has already instruc ons in the ma>er and counsel appearing for the State has clarified the State's view about the ma>er.
3. The above cap oned FIR was registered on the allega ons that Vinod Kumar, who was working as stamp-vendor in the New Courts was found involved and aAer comple on of the inves ga on, a police report under Sec on 173 Cr.P.C was filed against him and the prosecu on was launched. The trial Court framed the charges and proceeded to record the evidence.
4 The pe oner's grievance is men oned in paragraphs No. 7 to 13 of the pe on.
1 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2023 23:12:04 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450 CRM-M-58527-2023 2 2023:PHHC:147450 "7. It is also informed that on 04.10.2019 and 19.12.2019, the complainant was cross-examined by the counsel for the co- accused as well as the counsel for the Pe##oner jointly. However, unfortunately, as is evident from the cross- examina#on itself, material ques#ons regarding the involvement of the Pe##oner vis a vis his stamps being used have not been asked from the complainant. The version of the complainant is only based on hearsay when it comes to the Pe##oner since it is the co-accused statement to the complainant that the Pe##oner sells antedated stamp papers. This material witness has not been cross-examined in that light which would be necessary especially in view of the lengthy examina#on in chief conducted by the prosecu#on. In this regard a copy of the one sided cross- examina#on conducted by the counsels for both the co accused and the Pe##oner jointly is being annexed herewith as Annexure P-4.
8. That on 19.12.2019, the cross-examina#on of the said complainant witness, ie. PW-3, was concluded. A copy of the order dated 19.12.2019 is being annexed herewith as Annexure P-5.
9. That on 05.07.2022, the I.O. in the impugned FIR was examined at length as well. The examina#on in chief of the IO- PW-7 is being annexed herewith as Annexure P-6.
10. Therea4er, the said IO was examined by the counsel for the co-accused on 08.12.2022. The said cross- examina#on is being annexed herewith as Annexure P-7. However, the Pe##oner had engaged new counsel for the purposes of proper examina#on of the said material witness. The said fact is also reflected in the order dated 08.12.2022, wherein the counsel for the Pe##oner had sought #me to cross-examine the said material witness. The order dated 08.12.2022 is being reproduced below for ready reference:
CNR No: PBLD010121322018 CIS No: PC/10/2018 State VS RAKESH KUMAR @ Boby etc. Present: Sh.A.S.Adiwal Addl.P.P for the State.
Accused Rakesh Kumar on bail with Sh.S.Kumar Adv..
Accused Vinod Kumar on bail with Sh. Vijay Kumar Adv.
The learned counsel for the accused Vinod Kumar has filed his power of aDorney. PW7 Ins. Nirdosh Kaur is present 2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2023 23:12:05 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450 CRM-M-58527-2023 3 2023:PHHC:147450 and examined partly. Cross-examina#on on behalf of accused Vinod Kumar is deferred on request of his counsel as it is submiDed that he has been engaged today only The witness is bound down for 9.12.2022. All the remaining PWs be also summoned for the date fixed.
Date of Order: 08.12.2022 (Dr. Ajit Atri) Special Judge, Ludhiana.
UID NO. PB0440"
11. However, it is respecIully submiDed that the said counsel only cross-examined the IO-PW-7 in a vague and brief manner, with no reference to the detailed examina#on on SA conducted by the prosecu#on. The said examina#on would necessitate a detailed examina#on as to how the role of the Pe##oner could be fastened with criminal liability when even as per his own statement the IO has admiDed in the cross-examina#on conducted by the co-accused. A copy of the cross-examina#on conducted by the counsel for the Pe##oner is being annexed herewith as Annexure P. 8.
12. That on 04.05.2023, the evidence of the prosecu#on was closed. A copy of the order dated 04.05.2023 is being reproduced below for ready reference:
"CNR No: PBLD010121322018 CIS No: PC/10/2018 State VS RAKESH KUMAR @ Boby etc. Present: Sh.A.S.Adiwal Addl.P.P.for the State.
Acrused Rakesh Kumar @ Boby on bail with Sh.S.Kumar Adv..
Accused Vinod Kumar on bail with Sh. Harpreet Singh Adv..
PW Sh. Pradeep Kumar Agrawal present and examined as PW 14. PW12 Prabhjot Singh also present and cross- examined. The learned Addl.P.P.has closed the prosecu#on evidence. Adjourned to 11.5.2023 for recording statement of the accused u/s 313 C.P.C. Date of Order: 04.05.2023 (Dr. Ajit Atri) Addl. Sessions Judge, Ludhiana.
UID NO. PB0440"
3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2023 23:12:05 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450 CRM-M-58527-2023 4 2023:PHHC:147450
13. That on 19.10.2023, the Pe##oner distraught with the above- said predicament, changed his counsel who sought #me to lead defence evidence and address arguments. The order dated 19.10.2023 is being reproduced below for ready reference:
CNR No: PBLD010121322018 CIS No: PC/10/2018 State VS RAKESH KUMAR @ Boby etc. Present: Sh.A.S.Adiwal Addl. P.P. for the State.
Accused Rakesh Kumar on bail with Sh.S.Kumar Adv..
Accused Vinod Kumar on bail with Sh. Kanwaljit Singh Adv..
The learned counsel for accused Vinod Kumar has filed his power of aDorney and requested for adjournment for defence evidence as he has been engaged by the accused on today itself. Adjourned to 23.10.2023 for concluding the defence evidence, if any arguments.
Date of Order: 19.10.2023 (Dr. Ajit Atri) Special Judge, Ludhiana, UID NO. PB0440"
5. Ms. Swa Batra, D.A.G., Punjab, appearing for the State states that the FIR was registered in the year 2017 and now this applica on has been filed to further delay the trial which is already delayed. She further states that the trial is at the fag end and now apprehending the convic on, the accused are trying to delay the trial by filing frivolous applica ons.
6. The pe oner's grudge is that when the complainant (PW-3) was cross- examined by counsel on behalf of co-accused, as well as, counsel appearing for the pe oner jointly but unfortunately material ques on regarding pe oner's involvement vis-a-vis his stamps were not put to the complainant. The most of the averments are apprecia ng the statement of PW-3 and its eviden ary value which is not the scope of Sec on 311 Cr.P.C. The pe oner seeks re-examina on of PW-3 and PW-7 on the grounds of incomplete cross-examina on. A perusal of the applica on filed by the accused for re- examina on (Annexure P-9) points out that the only ground taken in the applica on was that the counsel for the accused did not properly cross-examine the witnesses. It has also 4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2023 23:12:05 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450 CRM-M-58527-2023 5 2023:PHHC:147450 been men oned in paragraph 3 of the said applica on that one material ques on which goes to the root of the case has not been put up but what was that ques on is not forthcoming from the perusal of the said applica on. A perusal of the applica on reveals that it is general in nature. The trial Court dismissed the said applica on aAer discussing all the arguments.
7. I have gone through the impugned order which is well reasoned and calls for no interference.
8. The charges in this case were framed in the year 2017 and examina on of PW-7 was completed on 24.09.2019. AAer that, PW-3 was again cross-examined on 19.12.2019 jointly by counsel for the pe oner and counsel for co-accused. Similarly, the inves gator was also cross-examined on 09.12.2022 at length and the prosecu on has closed its evidence on 04.05.2023. Statements of accused were recorded on 11.05.2023 and the case was adjourned for defence evidence, if any and arguments. The stage of the case also corroborates the stand taken by the State that the present applica on is filed simply only to delay the trial. In the en rety of facts and circumstances, there is no illegality in the impugned order and rather it is well reasoned and well founded.
9. Given above, the pe on is dismissed. All pending miscellaneous applica ons, if any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE
20.11.2023 Jyo#-II Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147450 5 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2023 23:12:05 :::