LawRato

Two criminal case pending and pw1 not appear for cross


23-Dec-2025 (In Criminal Law)
I have pending two criminal case institute on FIR 1. u/s 354,354d and 506 ipc stage of case : pending for cross examination of PW1 and 2. U/s 65 ,67 of IT Act Stage of case : summon to PW1 .In both case the complainant was same and accused also same . Case 1 : pending for cross examin since 2019 and in ordersheet summon order written . Then what to do on next date
Answers (5)

Answer #1
626 votes
In Case-1 (u/s 354, 354-D, 506 IPC), since the matter is pending for cross-examination of PW-1 & PW-2 since 2019 and the order sheet already shows summons issued, on the next date you should press for cross-examination. If PW does not appear despite summons, file an application seeking bailable/non-bailable warrants or closure of prosecution evidence due to prolonged non-appearance and delay, relying on the right to speedy trial.
Helpful? LawRato LawRato
Answer #2
628 votes
If PW-1 again remains absent despite summons, the court may be requested to take coercive steps under Sections 61–90 CrPC or close the prosecution evidence after granting last opportunity. In the IT Act case, on the date fixed for appearance of PW-1, the accused should be present and seek simultaneous or consecutive recording of evidence to avoid multiplicity and delay. The accused can also place reliance on Article 21 of the Constitution (right to speedy trial) and seek expeditious disposal
Helpful? LawRato LawRato
Answer #3
835 votes
Since both cases are between the same parties and are pending at the evidence stage, the immediate step on the next date is to comply with the court’s direction reflected in the ordersheet. In Case-1, where cross-examination of PW-1 and PW-2 is pending since 2019 and summons have been ordered, you should ensure that summons are properly issued and served, if witnesses again remain absent, move an application seeking bailable warrants / coercive steps or closure of prosecution evidence on the ground of repeated non-appearance and prolonged delay. You may also press for day-to-day cross-examination and oppose further adjournments by the complainant. In the IT Act case, where PW-1 has been summoned, be ready to proceed with cross-examination on appearance. Considering long pendency, you can file a common application for expeditious trial and also seek appropriate relief under law against abuse of process if delay is attributable to the complainant. Courts generally take a serious view of evidence pending for years without justification.
Helpful? LawRato LawRato
Answer #4
902 votes
Since both cases are pending and the complainant as well as the accused are the same, the next course of action depends on the stage mentioned in the order sheet. Case 1 (u/s 354, 354D, 506 IPC): As the matter is pending for cross-examination of PW-1 since 2019 and summons have already been issued, on the next date you should ensure the presence of PW-1. If PW-1 again fails to appear despite summons, you may move an application before the court seeking coercive steps such as bailable/non-bailable warrant or closure of prosecution evidence due to prolonged non-appearance and delay.
Helpful? LawRato LawRato
Answer #5
665 votes
The best available remedy with you in the present case is to approach the Hon'ble High for expeditious disposal of the case. However the order sheet needs to be examined first and figure out as to why is the case pending at the stage of Cross Examination of PW-1 since 2019.
Helpful? LawRato LawRato

Disclaimer: The above query and its response is NOT a legal opinion in any way whatsoever as this is based on the information shared by the person posting the query at lawrato.com and has been responded by one of the Divorce Lawyers at lawrato.com to address the specific facts and details.

Report abuse?

Comments by Users

No Comments! Be the first one to comment.

"lawrato.com has handpicked some of the best Legal Experts in the country to help you get practical Legal Advice & help."