Md. Abu Sahid @ Abu Sayed Ahmed v. The State of Assam and Anr

ORDER Date : 01.04.2024

Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent No.1

¶2This is an application filed u/s 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 16.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon in connection with POCSO case no 177/2021, u/s 376(3)/376(2)(f)/376(2)(n)/ 506 IPC read with section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon, Assam.

¶3It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case is at the stage of recording statement of the accused, defence witness and arguments. The informant was examined and cross examined in the year 2022. After that the statement of all the prosecution witnesses were recorded. Subsequently, after closing of the prosecution witnesses, the learned Special Public Prosecutor has filed a petition before the special judge to re-examine the informant i.e., PW1 u/s 311 Cr.P.C. But no specific ground has been mentioned in the petition by the Public Prosecutor as to why the re-examination of PW1 is required. It is only mentioned in the petition by referring the provision of section 22 (1) and 22 (3) of POCSO Act, wherein the petitioner is supposed to be prosecuted for making false statement before the court. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits Page No.# 3/3 that a direction may be given to the Public Prosecutor to file a fresh petition for re-examination of PW1 in accordance with law.

¶4On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has admitted that no specific ground has been provided in the petition for re-examination of PW1 by the public prosecutor. Let the Public Prosecutor be allowed to file another petition showing specific grounds for re-examination of PW1 and the trial court shall consider the matter accordingly.

¶5In view of the above, the order dated 16.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon is set aside.

¶6The learned trial court shall invite an application from the Public Prosecutor afresh in respect of re-examination of PW1 by following the provision of section 311 Cr.P.C. that re-examination of PW1 is required for just decision of the case. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010066882024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCrl.Rev.P./128/2024o MD.oABUoSAHIDo@oABUoSAYEDoAHMEDo S/OoGYASoUDDINoAHMEDo PERMANENToRESIDENToOFoVILL-oBARTHALo DOLOIGAON,oP.S.oMOIRABARI,oINoTHEoMORIGAONoDISTRICToOFoASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDoANRo TOoBEoREP.oBYoTHEoLEARNEDoPP,oASSAM 2:SALEHAoKHATUN oW/OoLATEoJANABoALIo R/OoVILL-oBORTHOLo KACHARIGAON o WARDoO.o8 oP.S.oMOIRABARI o DIST.oMORIGAON oASSAo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMRoSARFRAZoNAWAZo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAMoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI