[2025:RJ-JP:2477] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 8503/2024 Amit Kumar Palsaniya S/o Shri Suresh Kumar Palsaniya, R/o Dhani Raniji Wali, Ward No. 1, Shahpura, District Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ---Respondent 2. Ramavatar Verma S/o Late Shri Girdhari Lal, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Bunkar Mohalla, Shahpura, Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur. ---Complainant/Non Petitioner 3. Victim D/o Ramavatar Verma, R/o Ward No. 15, Bunkar Mohalla, Shahpura, Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur. ----Complainant/Non Petitioner For Petitioner : Mr. Girish Khandelwal, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 17/01/2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 against the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), Jaipur District (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Sessions Case No.31/2023 whereby the application filed by the petitioner to afford him an opportunity to cross- examine the prosecutrix was dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:2477] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8503/2024] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the examination of the prosecutrix was started on 02.12.2023 and she was examined on three different dates and finally on 08.08.2024, the cross-examination of the prosecutrix was completed by learned counsel for the co-accused Manish Kumar, however, the petitioner was not given proper opportunity for cross-examining the prosecutrix in this matter. Learned counsel also submits that he himself is conducting the trial on behalf of the petitioner before learned trial Court and on 08.08.2024 i.e. the date of cross- examination of the prosecutrix, he was out of station therefore, he could not appear before the trial Court for cross-examining the prosecutrix in this matter and learned trial Court vide order dated 07.10.2024 while dismissing the application filed on behalf of the petitioner, closed the petitioner's right to cross-examine the prosecutrix. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the prosecutrix, who was examined before the trial Court as PW-1, is the most important witness of this case. Learned counsel also contends that the trial against the petitioner is pending before the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 376 of IPC and cross-examination is the valuable right of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be granted proper opportunity for cross-examining the prosecutrix. 4. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:2477] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8503/2024] 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that it is a valuable right of the petitioner to cross- examine the prosecutrix, therefore, petitioner is granted one last opportunity on the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the prosecutrix. It is directed that the Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), Jaipur District shall give one last opportunity, to the petitioner to cross- examine the prosecutrix. No further opportunity shall be given to the petitioner. Payment of cost shall be prerequisite for cross- examination. In this regard, the petitioner is directed to place a certified copy of this order before learned trial Court so that learned trial Court may call the prosecutrix in time. 7. With the above directions, this petition is disposed of. 8. Pending application(s) also stands disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J AARZOO ARORA /100