Continuance of proceedings
MohammedRaffiq Bijapur
(Querist) 20 May 2012
This query is : Resolved
Trail was commenced (Warrant trail) Complainant was in witness box, examination-in-chief is concluded and cross is deferred, meanwhile the witness-complainant died.
My query is what would be the fate of prosecution case, Can in the absence of the testimony of the complainant, prosecution rely upon the evidence of other witnesses and can the accused be convicted on there testimony.
Arvind Singh Chauhan
(Expert) 20 May 2012
Sir it depends, on whose request the examination in chief was deferred. If it is on the request of accused how many adjournments were sought.
PARTHA P BORBORA
(Expert) 20 May 2012
if it is a summones procedure case court shall aquite the accused as provided by Sec 256 Cr.P.C..
BUT as it is a warrent procedure court will continue the case and examin other witnesses and passed the judgement on merit.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 20 May 2012
It would depend upon how much cross was completed. Does that provide some genuine grounds for conviction of the accused.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 20 May 2012
Dear Rafiq Sahab
It's depend on the case, as you inform that the case is warrant case, may be the heir of the complainant continue the proceeding.
according to Evidence act, this Chief will be count as Dying Declaration.
Feel Free to call
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 21 May 2012
yes. the case will be decided according to the deposition of the remaining witness.
-tom-
R Trivedi
(Expert) 21 May 2012
Pl inform case is under which Act or section ??
Since it is the warrant case prima facie it will be State Vs Accused, under the circumstances substitution is possible and continuation is surely possible.
Under any circumstances, you must file an application under CrPC 256 for discharge.
MohammedRaffiq Bijapur
(Querist) 21 May 2012
Thank U all brother experts.
Nadeem bhai I have not under stood how the heir of the complainant may be allowed to continue the proceeding.
and under what provision of Evidence Act the Chief will be counted as Dying Declaration (most probably u may refer Sec 32, but I statement made at the time of investigation is different than that of the statement given on oath.
So pls enlighten me something more
venkatesh Rao
(Expert) 22 May 2012
The evidence of a witness who could not be subjected to cross-examination due to his death before he could be cross-examined, is admissible in evidence, though the evidentiary value will depend upon the facts and circumstances of case. [Food Inspector v. James N.T., 1998 Cri LJ 3494, 3497 ) If the examination is substantially complete and the witness is prevented by death, sickness or other causes (mentioned in s 33) from finishing his testimony, it ought not to be rejected entirely. But if not so far advanced as to be substantially complete, it must be rejected. Deposition of a witness whose cross-examination became impossible can be treated as evidence and the court should carefully see whether there are indications that by a completed cross-examination the testimony was likely to be seriously shaken or his good faith to be successfully impeached . However the evidence would be inadmissible, if cross-examination was avoided or deliberately prevented.
