Cross-examination opportunity and recorded evidence justified setting aside acquittal and remanding the case for merits review.

The High Court held that acquittal could not be sustained where the complainant had already been examined, documentary evidence had been marked, and repeated opportunities for cross-examination had been granted, including after allowance of an application under Section 311 CrPC. Because the complainant remained absent despite that opportunity, no recall of the earlier order was sought, and the evidence stood as "no cross" rather than being expunged, the record could not be treated as one of no evidence. The acquittal was therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal on merits, with costs imposed for the complainant's conduct.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial court was justified in acquitting the accused when the complainant's evidence had been recorded but she was not subjected to cross-examination and the matter had not been finally decided on merits.

Analysis: The complainant had been examined, documentary evidence had been marked, and the trial court had granted opportunity to have her cross-examined, including after an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was allowed. Despite such opportunity, the complainant remained absent and no recall of the earlier order was sought. The record showed that the evidence was treated as "no cross" and not expunged, so the case was not one where there was no evidence at all. In these circumstances, the acquittal was set aside and the matter was directed to be reconsidered on merits, with costs imposed for the complainant's conduct.

Conclusion: The acquittal was not sustained and the matter was remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal on merits.

---