Asim Akhtar vs State Of West Bengal 2024 INSC 794 – S 319 CrPC – Cross Examination

Code Of Criminal Procedure 1973 – Section 319 –Is it mandatory to decide the application under section 319 CrPC before conducting cross-examination and only on the basis of examination-in-chief? The Constitution Bench judgment in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab does not take away the discretion of the Trial Court to wait for the crossexamination to take place before deciding the application under section 319 CrPC. It merely provides that consideration of such an application should not be a mini trial. It is for the Trial Court to decide whether the application should be decided without waiting for the crossexamination to take place or to wait for it. The same would depend upon the satisfaction of the Trial Court on the basis of the material placed on record- The complicity of any person sought to be arrayed as an accused can be decided with or without conducting cross-examination of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses, and there is no mandate to decide the application under section 319 CrPC before crossexamination of other witnesses. (Para 13-17)

Criminal Trial –The role of the complainant in a trial does not permit it to act as a Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. The complainant and its counsel have a limited role in a sessions trial in a State case. (Para 18)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *