Conditional costs for witness examination under criminal procedure are unsustainable when delay is shared and the opposite party would unfairly benefit.

Costs imposed as a condition for allowing an application to examine the sanctioning authority under Section 311 CrPC were held unsustainable where the trial delay was not attributable only to the applicant. The record showed that both sides contributed to the delay and that the Presiding Officer was also absent on some dates, so directing the petitioner department to pay costs to the accused would unjustly benefit the opposite party. The witness needed to prove sanction for prosecution was already permitted to be examined, and any cost direction, if made at all, should not have been payable to the accused persons.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order imposing costs on the petitioner as a condition for allowing the application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to examine the sanctioning authority was liable to be set aside.

Analysis: The cost was imposed because of delay in the trial, but the delay was not attributable only to the petitioner. The record indicated that both sides were responsible for the delay and that, on some dates, the Presiding Officer was also on leave. In such circumstances, directing the petitioner department to pay costs to the accused would unjustly reward the accused, particularly when the trial court had already permitted examination of the witness necessary to prove sanction for prosecution. If any cost was to be imposed, it ought not to have been made payable to the accused persons.

Conclusion: The order imposing costs on the petitioner was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to relief against the cost direction, while being required to produce the witness for proving sanction and to avoid further delay in the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: Costs imposed as a condition for procedural permission are unsustainable where the delay is not solely attributable to the applicant and the direction would unjustly benefit the opposite party.

---