EKENE GODWIN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent State.

(2.) The appellants are being prosecuted for offences punishable under Ss. 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sec. 66, read with Ss. 43(J) and 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The charge sheet has been filed, and the trial has proceeded. By the impugned order, the High Court rejected the appellants' application for regular bail.

(3.) During the hearing on an earlier date, we were informed that the Trial Court recorded the examination-in-chief of 12 prosecution witnesses (PW-1 to PW-12) one after the other on different dates without recording their cross-examination. Therefore, considering this peculiar procedure followed by the learned trial Judge, we requested the learned trial Judge to submit a report.