1 2025:CGHC:11553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 870 of 2025 Chanda @ Santosh Nagesh S/o Mani Nagesh Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Bastipara Lamgaon, Police Outpost - Raghunathpur, Police Station Lundra, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh (Accused No. 2) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lundra, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh (Prosecution) 2 - Xyz (Complainant/ Victim) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07.03.2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS,2023 by the petitioner challenging the order dated 24.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisggarh in Special Sessions (Atrocities) Case No. 40/2022 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking recall of PW-01 prosecutrix/victim for further cross-examination was rejected (Annexure P/1). 2. The case in nutshell is such that as per the prosecution story on 15.06.2022 respondent no. 2/prosecutrix lodged an FIR for the offence 2 punishable under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the co-accused Karamasai Nagesh stating that on 14.06.2022 at about 1 AM in the night, both the accused grabbed her hands and committed forceful intercourse against her will. After due investigation the accused persons were arrested. Spot map was prepared, medical examination of the victim/prosecutrix took place, recording of the statements of the witnesses , articles were sent for FSL and after completion filed the charge sheet on 12.08.2022 against the accused persons for the aforementioned sections. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner most humbly submitted that recall of PW-01 is essential to bring out material contradictions in her statements, which remain untested due to an incomplete cross- examination. The trial court failed to appreciate that recalling PW-01 is necessary for a just decision and not an attempt to improve the defense case. The Hon’ble Supreme court has emphasized that an oversight in the management of prosecution or defense should not be treated as an irreparable lacuna, and the courts must be magnanimous in permitting rectification of such errors. The trial court’s rejection of the recall application without considering its necessity for ensuring a fair trial is contrary to the established principles. Hence he prayed that this court may kindly set aside the impugned order dated 24.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur, Surguja, Chhattisgarh and further be pleased to allow the application moved by the petittioner under section 311 of the Cr.P.C. thereby permitting the recall of PW-01 for further cross examination in the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application for recalling of the victim and stated that she has already been examined and there is no other question left that has to be asked to her. Moreover calling of victim again and again for examination is against the law. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. On bare perusal of the documents produced before this court it is seen that in this case charge sheet has been presented on 12.08.2022. After the presentation of the charge sheet 25.03.2023 was fixed for prosecution evidence. Thereafter on 09.05.2023 victim/prosecutrix appeared and was subsequently examined by the advocate of the petitioner Mr. Santosh Singh, Advocate. On later dates, rest of the witnesses were examined by the same advocate of the petitioner. After looking at the deposition sheet of the victim it transpires that the victim has been examined in detailed on all the major and relevant points which are to be asked in the case and there pertains no need of recalling the victim/prosecutrix for further examination. 7. Therefore, this court finds that learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions (Atrocities) Case No. 40/2022 has committed no illegality or perversity in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking recall of prosecutrix/victim for further cross-examination in rejecting. 8. Hence, the present case being devoid of merits deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza