Investigating officer not barred from appearing as witness for accused in cross-case: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently allowed a plea to permit the appearance of an Investigating Officer (IO) of the police as a witness in a cross-case filed by a man arraigned as an accused in another related case [Veer Singh v State]..Justice Anand Pathak noted that Section 243 (evidence for defence) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) does not prevent an IO from testifying on behalf of the accused in a cross case. ."Scheme of Section 243 of CrPC indicates that defence/ accused can produce his evidence and it nowhere bars the Investigating Officer of cross-case to appear on behalf of accused in the case in which he is complainant so that truth can come to the fore as it would help the cause of justice to the extent where his act vicarious or individual or the extent of role would be determined," the judge observed. .The Court, therefore, allowed the application filed by the accused (petitioner before the High Court) under Section 311 (power to summon material witness or examine person present) of the CrPC..By way of background, the petitioner was among those accused of abusing and beating up a man in 2018. The applicant was accused of verbally and physically assaulting the man with sharp weapons when he and three others went to a river for a bath.For these alleged acts, a complaint was filed against the petitioner alleging the commission of offences under Section 307 (attempt to murder), 323 (hurt), 294 (obscene acts), 147-149 (unlawful assembly) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.Meanwhile, the petitioner filed a cross-case accusing the complainant in the above case of committing the offences under Sections 294 (obscene acts), 323 (hurt), 324 (grievous hurt), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.The petitioner then sought to produce as a witness in the cross case the police officer investigating the case against him. A trial court dismissed this application, prompting the petitioner to challenge the trial court's decision before the High Court. .The counsel for the petitioner informed the High Court that the petitioner wished to call an Inspector and two Sub-Inspectors as witnesses in the cross-case.The plea was opposed by the counsel for the State, who argued that since the petitioner had appeared before the trial court as a defence witness and given his evidence, calling the Investigating Officer as a witness would be a futile exercise..The High Court, however, opined that it would only aid the cause of justice if the petitioner is allowed to call the police officers as witnesses in his cross-case. "Petitioner intends to bring the witness to substantiate his position in the case whereby exact nature of individual role or motive or nature of allegation may get some factual benefits whereby he is facing trial as accused. In the process, justice would be the ultimate beneficiary because by this process truth may come about the exact nature of incident. It would not cause any dent to the prosecution because that aspect must have been clarified by the accused while appearing in the witness box as defence witness," the Court observed..The Court added that allowing the petitioner's application would not result in any prejudice."Therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice and in view of the ultimate goal of justice, impugned order passed by the trial court is hereby quashed. Petition preferred by the petitioner stands allowed," the Court held.The Court proceeded to direct the trial court to call the relevant witnesses sought by the petitioner in his application. .Advocates Sidharth Sijoria and Varun Sood appeared for the petitioner.Public Prosecutor Rajeev Upadhyay appeared for the State..[Read Order]