IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

     CRIMINAL  APPEAL No. 2036   OF  2008

                   [Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No.2929 of 2007]

   PRAHALAD MAHTO ...   Appellant(s)                         Versus    STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. ...  Respondent(s)

O R D E R  

Leave granted.

Despite service of notice, except for the State of Jharkhand, none of the  

other respondents, who are accused in the trial, are present before us.

The  appellant  before  us  is  the  complainant  on   whose  complaint,  the  

criminal proceedings were commenced.  It is his grievance that despite his repeated  

endeavours, he was not examined by the prosecution, as a witness and despite being  

the  victim  of  the assault,  his case was not being  

-2-

properly represented before the trial court.  He, in fact, made  an application to the

trial court to allow   his statement to be brought on the records.

Subsequently,  the  State  made  an  application  under  Section  311  of  the  

Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  to  examine  three  witnesses,  including  the  

complainant/appellant before us and   two other witnesses – one the Investigating  

Officer of the case, and the other the Medical Officer, who examined the victim.  The  

application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. was duly allowed by the trial court, but  

upon the accused moving  the High Court, the High Court   set aside the said order,  

against which the present appeal has been filed by the complainant.   In fact, the  

appeal  ought to have been filed by the State,  which seems to have been slack in  

prosecuting the case.  Be that as it may, having heard learned counsel for the parties,  

we are convinced that in order to do justice  between the parties,  the application  

under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the State was rightly allowed, notwithstanding the  

delay in the trial.

Accordingly, while setting aside the order of the High Court and restoring  

that  of  the  trial  court,  we direct  that   the   examination   of   the     defendants'  

witnesses  be    

-3-

completed within two months from the date of communication of this order and the  

trial is to be completed within three months thereafter.

The appeal is allowed accordingly.

             ...................J.                                 (ALTAMAS KABIR)   

             ...................J.                          (MARKANDEY KATJU)           

New Delhi, December 15, 2008.