Raju S/O Allahbaksh Pendri Alias Jamadar S/O Allahbaksh Pendri v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2024:KHC-D:18598( CRL.P(No.(103866(of(2024( ( (IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA,((

DHARWAD(BENCH(

THDATED(THIS(THE(27 (DAY(OF(DECEMBER,(2024(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(G(BASAVARAJA(

( CRIMINAL(PETITION(NO.(103866(OF(2024(

(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))( ( BETWEEN:(( ( RAJU,S/O.,ALLAHBAKSH,PENDRI,@,JAMADAR,, S/O.,ALLAHBAKSH,PENDRI,, AGED,ABOUT,30,YEARS,,OCC:,MECHANIC,, R/O.,SHIVYOGI,NAGAR,,ATHANI,,

TAL,ATHANI,DIST:,BELAGAVI-591304., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,Z.M.HATTARKI,,ADVOCATE),

, AND:( (

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, BY,ATHANI,POLICE,STATION,,BELAGAVI,DISTRICT,, REPTD.,BY,ITS,PUBLIC,PROSECUTOR,, HIGH,COURT,OF,KARNATAKA,,DHARWAD-560001., , Digitallytisigned by 2., ANNAPPA,S/O.,SANGAPPA,BADIGER,, MOHANKUMAR B0SHELAR S/O.,SANGAPPA,BADIGER,,, Location:0HIGH COURT0OF AGE:,53,YEARS,,OCC:,CARPENTER,, KARNATAKA DHARWAD R/O.,SHIVAYOGI,NAGAR,,ATHANI,, BENCH Date:02024.12.27 16:09:150+0530 TAL:,ATHANI,,DIST:,BELAGAVI-591304., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,ASHOK,KATTIMANI,,, ADDL.,GOVT.,ADV.,FOR,SOLE,RESPONDENT), , , THIS,CRIMINAL,PETITION,IS,FILED,U/S,482,OF,CR.P.C.,(528, OF,BNSS),,SEEKING,TO,QUASH,THE,ORDER,ON,APPLICATION,U/S, 311, OF, CR.P.C., DATED, 30.11.2024, BY, REJECTING, THE, SAID, APPLICATION, IN, SC, NO.17/2019, FOR, OFFENCES, PUNISHABLE, U/S, 363,, 376(2), (N), OF, IPC, AND, SECTION, 4, AND, 6, OF, POCSO, ACT,, PENDING, ON, THE, FILE, OF, ADDL.DISTRICT, AND, SESSION, JUDGE,, BELAGAVI,AND,FTSC-I.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA)

¶1The petitioner/accused has preferred this petition to quash the order passed by the trial Court dated

30.11.2024 in S.C.No.17/2019 and allowed the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the accused for further cross-examination of CW-33/PW-19.

¶2On behalf of the accused, the advocate had filed application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. to confront omissions and contradictions as required under Sections 145 and 157 of IPC to prove material contradiction and omission.

¶3The learned Magistrate has rejected this application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., on the ground that CW-33/PW-19 was cross-examined at length and the matter is of more than 6 years. In the application, it is clearly stated that: "The Investigation Officer PW-19/CW-33 was examined by this Hon'ble Court on 26.09.2024, on

the same day the witness was subject to cross examination, during the cross examination of this witnesses the statement of CW-11 who was examined as PW-7 has been confronted to prove material contradiction and omission but due to oversight the other contradiction which were arosed during the cross examination of CW-12 as exhibit-D2 and in the cross examination CW-13 as D3 and D4 which were not confronted to the IO due to over sight."

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would point out as to the omissions and contradictions marked as Exhibits D2 to D4, which is to be confronted to the Investigating Officer. By oversight, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/accused has not confronted the same to the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following judgments in support of his case: i. Satbir Singh Vs.State of Haryana reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1086 ii. State Vs. N.Seenivasagan reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 212

¶5It is settle principal of law that fair trial has to be conducted as required under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India. Further cross-examination of PW19 appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case. Learned Magistrate has not assigned any proper reasons to reject this application. Considering the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is just and proper to allow this application. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The order passed by the Additional District and Session Judge, FTSC-I, Belagavi, dated

30.11.2024 is quashed. Consequently, the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner/accused dated

30.11.2024 is allowed. iii. The trial Court is directed to provide an opportunity to the petitioner/accused for further cross-examination of CW-33/PW-19 as sought for in the application after providing opportunity

to the petitioner/accused for the cross-examination of CW-33/PW-19. iv. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the case in accordance with law. v. Registry is directed to send copy of the order to the trial Court.

Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

KGK Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12