← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49227/2012dismissed

Arvind Yadav v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-04-23Mr. Justice Amaresh Kumar Lal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49227 of 2012 ====================================================== Arvind Yadav S/O Sri Parmeshwar Yadav Resident Of VillagePrembigha, P.S- Obra In The District Of Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Deo Nath Singh @ Deo Nath Singh Yadav S/O Late Karu Singh @ Karu Yadav Resident Of Village- Prambigha, P.S- Obra In The District Of Aurangabad.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER 23-04-2015 Heard.

The accused-petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 2.11.2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Aurangabad, in Sessions Trial no. 135 of 2006 arising out of Obra P.S. Case no. 53 of 2006 by which the prayer of the petitioner to recall Punai Rajbanshi (P.W.4) for further cross-examination with regard to the previous statement made by this witness under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the material witnesses have turned hostile. Only P.W.4 has supported the case and he is fit to be recalled to enable the petitioner to ask questions as to whether "you have not said to the police that you have seen the occurrence." He has submitted that the investigating officer has not yet been examined.

It appears from the impugned order that the learned trial court has considered the prayer of the petitioner as well as the rejoinder to the petition and also the statement of P.W.4 before the investigating officer and his deposition in the court and came to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49227 of 2012 (2) dt.23-04-2015 2/2 conclusion that the recall of P.W.4 for further cross-examination is not in accordance with law and thus has rejected his prayer. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is dismissed.

(Amaresh Kumar Lal, J) sudip/- U T