Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, which allowed the respondents (accused) to cross-examine the approver (Pradeep Parab) at the pre-committal stage. The case arose from the murder of Dr. Asha Goel on 23 August 2003. The investigation was transferred to DCB CID, and charge-sheet was filed. Before committal, accused no.1 (respondent no.3) gave a confession and was tendered pardon under Section 306 CrPC. The Magistrate examined the approver under Section 306(4) CrPC. The respondents sought to cross-examine the approver, which was allowed by the Sessions Court. The State challenged this. The High Court held that under Section 306(4) CrPC, the examination of the approver by the Magistrate is only for the purpose of committal and not for trial. The accused has no right to cross-examine the approver at that stage. The right to cross-examine arises only after committal when the approver is examined as a witness in the Sessions Court. The court allowed the State's petition, setting aside the Sessions Court's order.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Right to Cross-Examine Approver - Pre-Committal Stage - Section 306(4) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The court examined whether an accused has a right to cross-examine an approver examined under Section 306(4) CrPC by the Magistrate before committal. Held that the accused has no such right at the pre-committal stage; the right to cross-examine arises only after the case is committed to the Court of Sessions, as the approver's statement under Section 306(4) is not substantive evidence but only for the purpose of committal. (Paras 1, 10-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an accused has a right to cross examine the approver, who is examined under Section 306(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Magistrate, at the pre-committal stage?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the State's petition, setting aside the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, which had allowed the accused to cross-examine the approver at the pre-committal stage. The court held that the accused has no right to cross-examine the approver under Section 306(4) CrPC before committal.
Law Points
- Right to cross-examine approver
- Pre-committal stage
- Section 306(4) CrPC
- Tender of pardon
- Committal proceedings
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (04) 35
Writ Petition No.237 of 2015
V. M. Kanade, Revati Mohite Dere
Mr. Raja B. Thakare (Special Public Prosecutor for Petitioner), Mr. Amit Jajoo a/w Mr. Mukesh Vats and Mr. Victor Basu i/b PKA Advocates (for Respondent No.1), Ms. Naima Shaikh i/b Khan Abdul Waheb (for Respondent No.2)
The State of Maharashtra (DCB, CID, Unit – II, Mumbai)
Narendra G. Goel, Pawankumar Satyanarayan Goenka, Pradeep Prabhakar Parab
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition by the State challenging the order of the Sessions Court allowing accused to cross-examine the approver at pre-committal stage.
Remedy Sought
The State sought to set aside the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, which allowed the respondents to cross-examine the approver at the pre-committal stage.
Filing Reason
The State challenged the Sessions Court's order granting the accused the right to cross-examine the approver before committal, arguing that such right does not exist under Section 306(4) CrPC.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, by order dated 10th January, 2006, granted pardon to Pradeep Parab and allowed the accused to cross-examine him. The High Court had earlier dismissed Criminal Writ Petition No.3919 of 2014 filed by respondent no.1 challenging the pardon order.
Issues
Whether an accused has a right to cross-examine the approver examined under Section 306(4) CrPC by the Magistrate at the pre-committal stage?
Submissions/Arguments
The State argued that the examination of the approver under Section 306(4) CrPC is only for the purpose of committal and not for trial, and the accused has no right to cross-examine at that stage.
The respondents argued that they have a right to cross-examine the approver to test his credibility even at the pre-committal stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The examination of the approver under Section 306(4) CrPC by the Magistrate is only for the purpose of committal and not for trial. The accused has no right to cross-examine the approver at that stage. The right to cross-examine arises only after the case is committed to the Court of Sessions, when the approver is examined as a witness.
Judgment Excerpts
The short question which arises for consideration in this petition is:- 'Whether an accused has a right to cross examine the approver, who is examined under Section 306(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Magistrate, at the pre-committal stage?'
We are of the opinion that the accused has no right to cross examine the approver at the pre-committal stage.
Procedural History
The case was registered as C.R.No.93 of 2003 for murder of Dr. Asha Goel. Investigation transferred to DCB CID. Charge-sheet filed. Before committal, accused no.1 (Pradeep Parab) was tendered pardon under Section 306 CrPC. The Magistrate examined him under Section 306(4). The accused sought to cross-examine him. The Additional Sessions Judge allowed the cross-examination. The State filed Criminal Writ Petition No.3919 of 2014 which was dismissed. The State then filed the present Writ Petition No.237 of 2015 challenging the order allowing cross-examination. The High Court allowed the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 306(4)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 397, 452, 34, 120B
