Skip to content


K. Venku Reddy and anr. Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1922Mad32; 65Ind.Cas.768
AppellantK. Venku Reddy and anr.
RespondentEmperor
Cases ReferredMawla Bux Biswas v. Derasatulla Sarkar
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 257 - prosecution witnesses summoned as defence witnesses, whether can be cross-examined. - - i think the point taken for the accused must succeed the magistrate having allowed the prosecution witnesses to be recalled as defence witnesses under section 257, criminal procedure code, must clearly have allowed them to be cross-examined by the accused......j.1. the only point is, whether the prosecution witnesses ought to have been allowed to be cross-examined. i think the point taken for the accused must succeed the magistrate having allowed the prosecution witnesses to be recalled as defence witnesses under section 257, criminal procedure code, must clearly have allowed them to be cross-examined by the accused. there is no finding that the application should not have been allowed as vexatious or dilatory. the cases which support accused's position are mawla bux biswas v. derasatulla sarkar 10. w.n. 19 and sheoprakash singh v.rawlins 28 c. 594. both cases decide that prosecution witnesses summoned under these circumstances, do not change their character and may be cross-examined by the accused. the convictions must be set aside.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Odgers, J.

1. The only point is, whether the prosecution witnesses ought to have been allowed to be cross-examined. I think the point taken for the accused must succeed The Magistrate having allowed the prosecution witnesses to be recalled as defence witnesses under Section 257, Criminal Procedure Code, must clearly have allowed them to be cross-examined by the accused. There is no finding that the application should not have been allowed as vexatious or dilatory. The cases which support accused's position are Mawla Bux Biswas v. Derasatulla Sarkar 10. W.N. 19 and Sheoprakash Singh v.Rawlins 28 C. 594. Both cases decide that prosecution witnesses summoned under these circumstances, do not change their character and may be cross-examined by the accused. The convictions must be set aside end the case remitted for re-trial according to law.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //