Allahabad High Court
AKHIESH KUMAR CHAUBEYversusDR. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
A fair opportunity to cross‑examine the complainant and his witnesses must be granted, and the petition is disposed with that direction.
Summary
The petitioner‑accused filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to quash a revisional judgment and an earlier order, alleging that he was denied a fair chance to cross‑examine the complainant after the complainant’s evidence was closed. The trial court had allowed the complainant’s recall application and proceeded to record the accused’s statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The petitioner argued that this prejudice his defence. The respondent‑complainant contended that the trial court correctly allowed the accused to cross‑examine and that the dates were erroneous but no error was committed. The High Court held that a fair opportunity to cross‑examine the complainant and his witnesses must be granted and directed that such cross‑examination be completed within two months. The Court further noted that if cross‑examination occurs, the accused may again be heard under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The petition was disposed with the direction, without quashing the earlier orders.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner‑accused was denied a fair opportunity to cross‑examine the complainant and his witnesses.
- Whether the trial court erred in allowing the complainant’s recall application and proceeding to record the accused’s statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
- Whether the High Court should quash the revisional judgment and the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313
Subjects
- Article 227
- cross‑examination
- Section 313 Cr.P.C.
- fair trial
- revisional jurisdiction
- High Court
- quash order
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 10828 of 2026
Akhiesh Kumar Chaubey
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Dr. Narendra Kumar Jain And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harish Chandra Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Prem Narayan Singh, Ram Bahadur,
G.A.
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anil Srivastava, learned
Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ram Bahadur, learned counsel for
respondent no. 1 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The petition is filed with the following prayer:-
"(1). Issue an order or direction to call for the records and **quash/set
aside** the Impugned Revisional Judgment & Order dated 24.06.2026
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (EC Act), Jhansi
in Criminal Revision No. 86 of 2025, as well as the Order dated
13.02.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.
1, Jhansi in Complaint Case No. 1245/2016 (New No. 2536/2024).
(Annexure no.7 and 9 of this petition)."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submits that complaint and
affidavit of examination-in-chief were filed. However, for cross
examination, the complainant was not appearing before the court
concerned and as such by order dated 17.3.2023 the complainant evidence
was closed. Subsequently on 5.4.2023 statement under Section 313
Cr.P.C. of petitioner-accused was recorded and recall application was
filed by respondent no. 1-complainant and the same was allowed by order
dated 13.2.2025 on payment of cost of Rs. 1500/- against which revision
was filed and revision has been rejected. Learned counsel for the
petitioner-accused further submits that after recording of the statement
under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of the petitioner-accused, the recall application
A227 No. 10828 of 2026
2
was allowed which would prejudice the petitioner.
4. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent
no. 1-complainant submits that incorrect date was noted by the
complainant and as a result of the same the complainant could not appear
and on 17.3.2023 order was passed. Learned Senior Counsel appearing
for respondent no. 1-complainant further submits that examination-in-
chief is submitted along with the affidavit and it is for the petitioner-
accused to cross examine. Therefore, the trial court has committed no
error in opening of the evidence of the petitioner-accused and respondent
no. 1-complainant as the same was to provide an opportunity to the
accused to cross examine the complainant.
5. On a query being made to learned counsel for the petitioner-accused
that whether he would cross examine the complainant and its witnesses,
learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submits that petitioner-accused
is ready to cross examine the complainant and the complainant witnesses.
6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that a fair opportunity
should be granted to the petitioner-accused to cross examine the
complainant and its witnesses. Therefore, one opportunity is granted to
the petitioner-accused to cross examine the complainant and their
witnesses. The aforesaid opportunity may be availed within a period of
two months from today for appearance of the complainant and his
witnesses. If the complainant and his witnesses are cross examined, then
petitioner-accused would have further opportunity for recording statement
under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and leading evidence, leaving it open for the
court concerned to proceed with the matter.
7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition is disposed of.
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
September 28, 2026
VMA
Digitally signed by :-
VISHWA MOHAN ARORA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…