Lal Mohammad vs State of U.P.

S.C. Agarwal, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned orders.

The instant revision is directed against the order dated 17.5.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (B.C.) Act, Pilibhit in S.T. No. 450 of 2009 State v. Riyazul and others whereby the application moved by defence for recalling PW1 Hansmukhi for further crossexamination was rejected.

Learned Counsel for the revisionist submitted that the accused filed a large number of love letters written by PW1 Hansmukhi in defence. These love letters were not available when PW1 was being crossexamined and, therefore, application was moved by defence for recalling PW1 for further crossexamination to confront her with the love letters written by her.

Learned A.G.A. supported the impugned order.

The application under section 311 Cr. P.C. was rejected by the trial Court on the ground that the accusedpersons have not written in the application that these letters were not in their custody at the time of crossexamination of PW1. The accused could have confronted PW1 with these letters at the time of her crossexamination, and it is not necessary to recall PW1 for further crossexamination.

Having considered the submission made by learned Counsel for the parties and the orders passed by the trial Court, I am of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained. Whether these letters were in possession of accused when PW1 was earlier examined is a matter to be inquired into when the accusedpersons produce defence evidence to prove these letters, if necessary. The defence alleges that the love letters were written by PW1 to the accused. In these circumstances, it will be in the interest of Justice to confront PW1 with these so called love letters to find out whether these letters were written by her to the accused and also whether these letters are in her handwriting.

In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be sustained, and is liable to be setaside. Criminal Revision is allowed. Impugned order dated 17.5.2010 is setaside and the application filed by defence for permitting further crossexamination of PW1 Hansmukhi is allowed. However, the further crossexamination of PW1 shall be confined only on the following points:

(i) whether the alleged love letters are in the handwriting of PW1.

(ii) whether PW1 wrote these letters to the accused.

Crossexamination of PW1 shall not be permitted on any other point.

Revision Allowed.