Y. Ramesh vs State Of Telangana And Another on 9 November, 2020
9. As far as Crl.P. No.945 of 2020 is concerned, the learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that the daughter of PW.3,
Ms. Y. Pavani, is neither a listed witness, nor shown her name either
1
. 2018 (0) Supreme (J&K) 631
2
. (2013) 14 SCC 461
KL,J
Crl.P. Nos.828 & 945 of 2020
5
in the complaint or in the charge sheet. Despite the same and without
appreciating the fact that she is not an eye-witness, the trial Court has
allowed Crl.M.P. No.153 of 2019, which is contrary to the scope and
ambit of Section 311 of Cr.P.C. In support of his contention, the
learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decisions
in: i) V. Vani v. V.B.V.S.M.K. Prasad3; ii) Laveti Kamala v. State
of A.P., rep.by P.S. Alwal4; and iii) State by Inspector of Police v.
S. Sankaran5.