High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/16794/2024disposed of

Jai Parkash v. Rajesh Kumar

2025-10-29Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi2 pages

CRM-M-16794-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16794-2024 Date of decision: 29.10.2025 JAI PARKASH .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

RAJESH KUMAR ...RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Peeush Gagneja, Advocate for the respondent. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for quashing of the order dated 06.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Abohar, whereby the application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed. 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there are certain discrepancies in the statements made by the complainant before the Civil Court and while deposing in the instant case. On account of those said discrepancies, his further cross-examination is required to be conducted. For the said purpose he had filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., which was declined. He seeks only one opportunity to conduct the further cross-examination of the complainant/Rajesh Kumar and there is no intention on his part to delay the proceedings. 3.

The learned counsel for the respondent/complainant has vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner contending that there are no KUSUM 2025.10.31 19:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRM-M-16794-2024 contradictions pointed out by the petitioner/accused when his application was moved under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. Therefore the present petition is liable to the dismissed.

I have heard learned counsels for the parties. 5.

The purpose of a trial is that the unvanished truth is brought before the Court. For the said purpose, if the accused has sought one opportunity to further cross-examine the complainant, no irreparable loss would be caused to the complainant in any manner. 6.

In view of the above, the impugned order dated 06.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Abohar, stands quashed subject to a payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs to the complainant.

The petitioner-accused is granted one opportunity to further cross-examine the complainant/Rajesh Kumar.

After the completion of the further cross-examination of the complainant/Rajesh Kumar, the Trial Court is directed to conclude the Trial not later than 08 weeks.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 29.10.2025 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No KUSUM 2025.10.31 19:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh