High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 09 UK CK 0165

Sonu @ Rajendra Kumar vs State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 13 September 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Prafulla C. Pant, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 227 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 214 words

Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.

2.

This revision is directed against the order dated 27.07.2011, passed by Trial Court (Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar) in Sessions Trial No. 9 of 2009, whereby said court has rejected the application moved by the revisionist u/s 311 Code of Criminal Procedure.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that Petitioner and other accused are facing trial in respect of offences punishable u/s 498A, 307, 304B Indian Penal Code, and one punishable u/s 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. P.W. 1 Raju Saxena, P.W. 2 Sukhrani and P.W. 3 Sunita Devi have already been examined and cross-examined before the trial court. After close of their evidence, the revisionist moved an application u/s 311 Code of Criminal Procedure, that he wants to further cross-examine the three witnesses without disclosing what specific question was left out.

4.

If the application u/s 311 Code of Criminal Procedure, is allowed in the above circumstances, it would encourage winning over the witnesses, and make the trial a futile exercise. That is not the spirit of the law. For the reasons as discussed above, this Court finds No. illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court.

5.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this revision is dismissed summarily.