RAJESH AND ORS vs STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 7th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 469/2026& CRL.M.A. 1875/2026 & CRL.M.A. 1876/2026 RAJESH AND ORS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Girish Gupta with Ms. Sidhi Sharma, Advocates. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP with SI Sunil Chauhan. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioners seek quashing of order dated 10.11.2025 whereby their request to recall prosecutrix for further cross-examination has not been acceded to. 2. The alleged incident took place on 04.08.2023 and after comprehensive investigation and arrest of the accused persons, charge-sheet was filed on 19.09.2023. 3. Since it was a case of sexual assault upon a child and, inter alia, involving Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 the case was committed to Court of Sessions. 4. Prosecutrix (PW-1) entered into witness box on 05.02.2024 and same day, her examination-in-chief was recorded. Her cross examination was deferred for 14.03.2024. Signature Not Verified Signed By:SONIA CRL.M.C. 469/2026 1 THAPLIYAL Signing Date:10.02.2026 10:18:17 5. On 14.03.2024, the then learned defence counsel cross-examined her at length on behalf of all the accused persons. During course of the arguments today, copy of her deposition was shown which indicates that such cross-examination of prosecutrix was exhaustive and elaborate one, running into more than 12 pages. 6. Thereafter, there was change in counsel and the new counsel filed his vakalatnama in the year 2024 itself and cross-examination of the other witnesses was conducted by such new counsel only. 7. An application was filed before the learned Trial Court under Section 348 BNSS (corresponding Se