Karnataka High Court: B.A. Patil, J. while allowing the appeal set aside the Judgment of the trial court with a direction to recall the witnesses who have not been cross-examined.
Asif Hussain, the appellant/accused in the instant case preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of his conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 397 of Penal Code, 1860 passed by the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
Sirajuddin Ahmed, Counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial court did not give full opportunity to the accused to cross-examine all the witnesses and passed the impugned order erroneously.
In consonance to the Counsel for the appellant, M. Divakar Maddur, High Court Government Pleader submitted that the evidence of PW7 was not fully chief examined and for this no reason was assigned.
The Court after analyzing the evidences given in the trial court observed that witnesses were examined. But, after the Public Prosecutor was done with the examination-in-chief, counsel for the accused took time for preparation. However, the court below rejected the prayer without any justifiable reasons and took that there is no cross examination. Moreover, PW7 was examined-in-chief in part. The cross examination of PWs 9 and 10 was not even recorded. The material witnesses who were examined before the Court were also not cross-examined. Thus, it was clear that principles of natural justice were not followed.
The Court remitted back the matter and directed the trial court to expeditiously dispose of the case.[Asif Hussain v. State, 2019 SCC OnLine Kar 1600, decided on 04-09-2019]
