KRISHNA KUMAR, J. - (1.) THIS revision has been filed against the order dated 23-1-2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad whereby the prayer of the accused for further cross-examination of a witness was rejected.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel of the par­ties. The learned Counsel of the revisionists contended that the Counsel of the accused was not present and, there­fore, the cross-examination could not be done and the accused should be allowed an opportunity for further cross-examina­tion. From the papers filed, it is clear that the case was fixed for cross-examination of prosecutrix on 5-1-2001 but the adjourn­ment was sought on the ground that the Counsel of the accused had gone to Delhi. It is also clear that on earlier dates also opportunity was given to the accused to cross-examine the witness when the ex-amination-in-chief was done by the prosecution. The learned lower Court al­lowed further opportunity and fixed 23-1-2000. On 23-1-2000 again adjournment application was moved by the accused that the Counsel was engaged on that very date and as such he could not prepare the case. If the Counsel of the accused was ill on 5-1-2001, the accused could have engaged another Counsel for the next date which was fixed after 18 days. It is clear that the witness, who is prosecutrix, was being harassed by the accused. The adjourn­ments were being prayed so that the prosecutrix may not appear before the Court again and again. It is clear from the order that only on the request of the ac­cused persons, the prosecutrix Km. Shahin was summoned for further cross-examina­tion although her evidence was concluded in 1997 and that on the application dated 25-2-1997 of the accused, she was again summoned for cross-examination. The learned lower Court has, therefore, com­mitted no mistake in rejecting the applica­tion because more than sufficient oppor­tunity was allowed to the accused persons. The accused cannot be allowed to harass the witness, particularly, when she is the prosecutrix in case under Section 376, 1.P.C.
(3.) IN view of the above facts, the revision has no force and is hereby rejected. Revision rejected.;