On 17.3.1998, the girl and accused Prem Chand were found in Noida by the police.
The learned trial Judge, by an order dated July 15, 2000 arraigned the appellants as additional accused and summoned them to stand trial.
Therefore on August 11, 1998, charges were framed only against Prem Chand.
The question involved in this case is whether the statement of a prosecution witness without the said witness having been cross examined, companystitutes evidence within the meaning of Section 319 of Cr.
On April 15, 1999, PWs 1, 2 and 3 were examined by the prosecution.
P.C. for arraigning the appellants as additional accused.
On May 20, 1999, the prosecutrix was examined as PW 4 and her cross examination had begun, when the Public Prosecutor moved an application under section 319 of the Cr.
P.C., 1973.
Shah, J. Leave granted.
For deciding the question involved, facts are on 16.3.1998, Shri Sat Pal, father of the prosecutrix Manju Bala lodged an FIR at police station Gharaunda, District Karnal, Haryana under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC on the allegation that his minor daughter Manju Bala aged about 16 years had gone from the house on March 15, 1998 about 7.30 p.m. at Bara the place where cattles are tethered , but did number return thereafter.
The appellants preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.1016 of 2000 before the High Court which was dismissed.
Hence the present appeal.
After investigation, the police found that the appellants Rakesh and Jai Bhagwan were number involved in the case.
