← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhCRR/864/2018disposed off

Jai @ Dhananjay Mahanad v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-10-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No. 864 of 2018 Jai @ Dhananjay Mahanad S/o Poshan Lal Mahanand, aged about 24 years, R/o Siddharth Nagar, Near Kali Mandir, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.). --- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Police Station Pulgaon, District- Durg (C.G.). ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. Anurag Khatri, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order on Board 01/10/2018 1.

Heard on admission.

2.

This revision has been preferred against the order dated 20/07/2018, whereby the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg rejected the application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C submitted by the applicant. 3.

A charge-sheet under Section 302, 307, 323, 212, 147, 148, 149 and 34 of the IPC and Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act has been filed against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. The trial is going on before 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in S.T. No. 74/2017. On 21/05/2018, Aniket Sancheti (PW8) has been examined and re-examined. Thereafter, on 20/07/2018, an application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant for recalling the said Aniket Sancheti (PW8) on the ground that at the time of cross-

examination of said witness some important and relevant questions were put before him. The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the said application vide order dated 20/07/2018. 4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record available.

5.

Deposition of Aniket Sancheti (PW8) is also annexed with this revision. A bare perusal of the said deposition shows that a detailed crossexamination was done and all the questions on the material points have been asked from him. Therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly rejected the said application.

6.

Considering the above aspect, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. The revision has no merit and the same is dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Rahul