Kolkata: Observing that there is no coded law that mandates expunging of a key witness’ testimony due to absence of cross-examination, Calcutta High Court dismissed the plea of a man accused of abduction and criminal conspiracy.
The bench of Justice Bibhas Ranjan De was moved by the accused challenging a trial court order allowing examination of prosecution witnesses despite the absence of key witness for cross-examination. The case involves charges under multiple sections of the IPC, including abduction and criminal conspiracy.
The trial court had recorded evidence from 15 witnesses, but the victim (PW 16), after examination-in-chief, became untraceable, prompting the court to proceed with other witnesses while deferring PW 16’s cross-examination.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the trial court’s decision violated the accused’s rights and sought to expunge PW 16’s evidence. The state, led by Public Prosecutor Debasis Roy, countered that PW 16’s testimony was vital and expunging it would hinder justice, given his untraceability.
The court observed that Section 135 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, grants courts discretion to regulate the order of witness examination when no specific legal provision exists. The court found no codified law mandating the expunging of PW 16’s examination-in-chief due to the absence of cross-examination.
The trial court’s decision to proceed with other witnesses while deferring PW 16’s cross-examination was within its discretion and did not violate the accused’s rights, the high court observed.
The court said the evidentiary value of PW 16’s testimony, without cross-examination, can be assessed during the final hearing and the prosecution may produce PW 16 for cross-examination later, subject to justifying the delay.