Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Shri Vardachari s/o. Rangachari, filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, seeking quashing of an order dated 10.3.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge, Chandrapur in Special Case (ACB) No.4 of 1998. The applicant was the accused in a corruption case. During the trial, the defence filed an application (Exh.77) contending that they came to know in December 2010 that the first informant, Ku. Surekha, was involved in serious misconducts and had been suspended, with a departmental enquiry finding her guilty. The defence obtained documents regarding these misconducts in the third week of December 2010 and produced them on 4.1.2011 (Exh.73), which were allowed to be produced by the trial court. The defence then sought to examine certain witnesses to prove those documents as part of their defence evidence. The learned trial Judge rejected the application, holding that the documents were not relevant. The applicant argued that the documents were relevant to impeach the credibility of the complainant and that the defence had a right to lead evidence to prove them. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the trial court's order was erroneous as the documents were relevant and the defence was entitled to examine witnesses to prove them. The court allowed the application, quashed the impugned order, and directed the trial court to permit the defence to examine the witnesses sought to be examined, subject to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine them. The court also directed the trial court to expedite the trial and dispose it of as early as possible.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Defence Evidence - Section 233 CrPC - Right of Accused to Lead Evidence - The accused has a right to lead defence evidence to prove documents that are relevant to impeach the credibility of the complainant. The trial court's rejection of the application to examine witnesses was held to be erroneous as the documents were relevant and the defence had a right to prove them. (Paras 2-4) B) Criminal Procedure - Inherent Powers - Section 482 CrPC - Quashing of Order - The High Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, can set aside an order that erroneously denies the accused the opportunity to lead defence evidence. The impugned order was quashed and the trial court was directed to permit the defence to examine witnesses. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the defence application to examine witnesses to prove documents relating to the complainant's misconduct, which were relevant to the defence case.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.3.2011 is quashed and set aside. The trial court is directed to permit the defence to examine the witnesses sought to be examined, subject to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine them. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and dispose it of as early as possible.
Law Points
- Right of accused to lead defence evidence
- Relevance of documents to impeach credibility of complainant
- Section 482 CrPC inherent powers
- Section 233 CrPC defence evidence
