Awadesh Narayan v. State

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + AWADESH NARAYAN ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Hemant Kumar, Mr. Mohit Chhibber, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP with Insp. Sangha Mitra, PS Rajinder Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 02.09.2016 Crl.M.A. 13601/2016 Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. 1.

Aggrieved by the order dated 14th July, 2016 the petitioner who is an accused in FIR No.187/2013 pending trial before the Special Judge, ACB vide CC No.1/2015 has preferred the present petition. Vide the impugned order the State was permitted re-examination of PW-14 Brijesh Mishra. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the petitioner was able to elucidate from Inspector Brijesh Mishra PW-14 in crossexamination that the post-mortem was got delayed as one of the daughter of

the deceased was abroad, the State cannot be given liberty to re-examine the witness as has been directed vide the impugned order dated 14th July, 2016. He further states that the application filed by the State for re-examination must disclose on what issues re-examination of the witness is sought. 3.

The State filed an application in the above-noted trial on the ground that during cross-examination PW-14 Inspector Brijesh Mishra had introduced certain new facts, thus the same were required to be clarified by re-examination.

4.

Section 137 of the Indian Evidence Act permits re-examination of the witness subsequent to the cross-examination. The very purpose of reexamination is to explain new facts which has been brought out in the crossexamination. Following the decision of the Supreme Court reported as (1998) 8 SCC 649 Rammi @ Rameshwar Vs. State of M.P. and Bhura @ Sajjan Kumar Vs. State of M.P. the learned Special Judge noted that the purpose of re-examination is to explain matters which has been brought out in cross-examination and the same should be liberally granted. 5.

Further Section 138 Indian Evidence Act also provides: "138. ...... Direction of re-examination- The re-examination shall be directed to the explanation of matters referred to in cross-examination; and, if new matter is, by permission of the Court, introduced in re-examination, the adverse party may further cross-examine upon that matter.

6.

It is thus evident that the very purpose of re-examination is to explain facts which have cropped up in cross-examination with a further right to the adverse party to cross-examine the witness.

7.

In view of the provision of Section 138 Indian Evidence Act and the law laid down by the Supreme Court I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge permitting re-examination of the witness.

8.

Petition is dismissed.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 02, 2016 'ga'