Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

After submission of the charge sheet, the petitioner submitted an application under Section 190 Cr.P.C. but the same was dismissed. Thereafter, statements of the material witnesses i.e. PW1-Renu Khidiya (petitioner), PW2-Bhagwati Singh and PW3- Vimla Devi were recorded. In view of court statements of the material witnesses, the petitioner submitted an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court but the same was dismissed vide order dated 24 th May, 2018. Against the said order, present criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for petitioner further argued that learned trial court on Page No.9 of the impugned order mentioned about the order dated 17.2.2009, whereas, at the stage of 319 Cr.P.C., there is no relevancy of order under Section 190 of Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for petitioner further contended that it is an admitted legal position that while considering an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., the only document, which is liable to be considered, is the testimony of the prosection witnesses but, that too, without tested by cross-examination. The defence set up by the previous accused and cross-examination by them is totally irrelevant for proposed accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. The learned trial court on Page No.10 of the impugned order exceeded their jurisdiction and not only cross-examination was considered but also defence documents were taken into consideration.

Learned counsel for petitioner further contended that learned trial court has failed to appreciate the fact that for an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., the only document, which can be considered, is the statements of prosecution witnesses not tested by cross-examination and the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. is totally irrelevant for consideration of the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. The learned trial court on page 10 of (4 of 9) [CRLR-1080/2018] impugned order not only considered the statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. but also considered the statement recorded as "Further Statement". The above evidence is totally irrelevant for consideration of an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. In this regard, learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the following cases:

(5 of 9) [CRLR-1080/2018] Learned counsel for respondents further argued that after dismissal of the application under Section 190 Cr.P.C., the petitioner filed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for adding respondent Nos.2 and 3 as accused in the charge sheet. It is submitted that application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed after inordinate delay of more than nine years from the date of dismissal of the appilcation under Section 190 Cr.P.C.