RAKESH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the impugned order dtd. 11/12/2017 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, whereby application (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. seeking re-examination of the witnesses i.e. PW2-ASI Amandeep Kaur, PW6-Abdul Salam and PW7-Rashida Khatoon(complainant), was dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that there was no appointment of Legal Aid Counsel to defend the petitioner-accused or to cross-examine the witnesses. The petitioner-accused could not properly cross-examine the witnesses i.e. PW2, PW6 and PW7 as he was not being represented by a counsel of his choice. The Court at his own wisdom has appointed the Legal Aid Counsel, who without having gone into the facts of the case deeply and in the absence of any Power of Attorney executed by the petitioner, has cross-examined these witnesses. He states that valuable right of the petitioner is involved in the case and if the witnesses examined by the prosecution namely PW2, PW6 and PW7 are not being allowed to properly re/cross-examine, the petitioner shall suffer badly and adversely. Moreover, no prejudice is going to be caused to the prosecution in case re-examination of the aforesaid witnesses is allowed as it will clinch the real issue.

(3.) Learned State Counsel has argued that the petitioner had the ample opportunities to cross-examine the aforesaid witnesses and the learned trial Court has allowed the defence counsel to cross-examine the witnesses and therefore, having recourse to the provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, learned trial Court has appointed Mr. Arun Shokeen as a counsel in the case who has cross-examined the witnesses in the case. He was a Retainer being a Legal Aid Counsel and has duly cross-examined those witnesses. Power of Attorney is not required for Legal Aid Counsel once the Court has appointed the Legal Aid Counsel.