Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010076852025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./432/2025 ANJAR ALI ALIAS ANJAR HUSSAIN S/O INNASH ALI R/O VILL DABLU GAON PS KAHCUA DIST NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM 2:SAHIDUL ISLAM S/O ABDUL HAMID ALI R/O AUTALBARI GAON PS LAHORIGHAT DIST MORIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U DUTTA, MR. B. KUMAR,B DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 10.04.2025 Heard Mr. B Dutta, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms S.H. Borah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 challenging the order dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon in POCSO Case Page No.# 2/2 No. 358/2023. 3. The POCSO Case No. 358/2023 was pending for passing the judgment. The learned Trial Judge observed that the evidence of the PW-1 was very ambiguous and on that evidence it would be difficult to arrive at a just decision. Therefore, in exercise of power under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The learned Trial Judge issued summons to the victim/ PW-1 for further examination by the court. 4. Mr. Dutta has submitted that the PW-1 was examined and cross-examined in the Trial Court. There is no ambiguity in her evidence. Mr. Dutta has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that was delivered in A.G. Vs. Shiv Kumar Yadav and Anr. reported in (2016) 2 SCC 402. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in order to fill up the lacunas in the evidence no witness should be overlooked. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 6. It appears that the order dated 11.03.2025 was passed by the trial court on its own motion. The trial court should have heard the learned counsel of both sides. 7. Therefore, the impugned order dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon in POCSO Case No. 358/2023 is set aside. 8. The trial court is directed to hear both the sides and thereafter, shall pass a fresh order on the said subject. In the prayer portion, one date has been erroneously mentioned. So, the petitioner shall be at liberty to make correction in the said matter in presence of the registry officials. With the aforesaid direction, the criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant