Anjali Bhasin v. M/S Breamarseascope India Pvt Ltd

Delhi High Court · 25 Nov 2019
Justice Chandershekhar
CRL.M.C.2065/2019
criminal appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner one final opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses subject to costs, setting aside the trial court's order under its inherent jurisdiction to ensure a fair trial.

Full Text
Translation output
n $-37to 39 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C.2065/2019
CRL.M.C.2066/2019
CRL.M.C.2067/2019
MS.ANJALIBHASIN Petitioner
Through Ms.RebeccaM.John,Sr.Adv. with Mr.Sudarshan,Mr.Sarvan
Ritam Khare,Ms.Shweta Chaurasia and Ms.Anjali,Advs.
VERSUS
M/SBREAMARSEASCOPEINDIA PVT T TD
Through Mr.AjayK.Dutta,Adv. HON^EMR.JUSTICECHANDERSHEKHAR
0/^ 25.11.2019
ORDER

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482ofthe Code ofCriminal Procedure,1973(Cr.P.C.)for setting aside the impugned order dated 3.4.2019 passed in CC No.29505/2016 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House,New Delhi.

2. Learned SeniorCounselforthe petitionersubmittedthatinthe interest ofjustice, the petitioner may be given an opportunity to furthercross-examine CW-2and CW-3.Learned Senior Counselfor thepetitionerfiirthersubmittedandundertookthatthepetitionershall cross-examineCW-2and CW-3onthenextdateofhearing and she shall conclude the cross-examination ofboth the witnesses on the 2019:DHC:7750 same day and shall not take more than one hour for the crossexaminationofeach witness andin case shetakes morethan one hour for each witness,the Trial Court may close the cross-examination of the said witnesses.

3. Learnedcounselfortherespondentthoughinitiallyopposedthe prayerofthelearned SeniorCounselforthe petitionerbutaftersome arguments submitted thatjustto cutshortthe delay and expedite the proceedingsaswellasintheinterestofjustice,hehasnoobjectionin casethepetitionerisgranted oneopportunitytofurthercross-examine CW-2andCW-3beforetheTrialCourtsubjecttoheavycosts.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is willing and ready to pay a sum ofRs.60,000/- in each petitionascostsincasetheimpugnedorderdated[3].4.2019issetaside and the petitioner is granted one more opportunity to cross-examine CW-2and CW-3.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that CW-2 has left their employment,hence,they would not produce CW-2before the Trial Court.However,CW-3 shall remain present for his crossexaminationonthenextdateofhearingbeforetheTrialCourt.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner shall take necessary steps to summon and produce CW-2 beforetheTrialCourtonherownresponsibility.

7. In view of the no objection of the learned counsel for the respondent as well as in the interest ofjustice,the impugned order dated 3.4.2019 issetaside subjecttothecostsofRs.60,000/- m each petitionasagreedbythepetitionertobepaidtotherespondentbefore the Trial Court and the petitioner is allowed to further cross-examine theCW-2andCW-3beforetheTrialCourtsubjectto availability and productionoftheaforesaid witnesses.

8. It is clarified that in case the petitioner fails to further crossexamine CW-2 and CW-3 on the aforesaid date, no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner for the crossexaminationofCW-2andCW-3onany ground whatsoever.

9. The petitions are disposed of. CHANufe^HEKHAR,J