SRI K. JAYANTH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

(2.) Earlier, the petitioner has filed Criminal Petition before this court in CRL.P No.8308/2017. Vide order dated 31.1.2018, this court has directed the Trial Court to secure the presence of PWs.6 and 7 and provide an opportunity to the petitioners to cross examine the witnesses on cost of Rs. 2,000/-. Subsequently, the petitioner has promptly deposited the said amount before the Trial Court and the Trial Court has also issued summons to PWs.6 and 7, on various occasions. Particularly when the case was posted on 15.5.2018 the witnesses PWs.6 and 7 were present; but on that day, the accused and her counsel remained absent and the court again taken the cross examination of PWs.6 and 7 as Nil by passing a detailed order. Being aggrieved by the said order, the accused persons have changed their counsel and filed an application on 28.5.2018 requesting the court to recall PWs.1, 2, 6, 7, 9 and 10 for further cross examination. The learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the said application vide order dated 11.6.2018, which is impugned in this petition.

(3.) At the time of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner confined his arguments so far as recalling of PWs. 6 and 7 are concerned. On the face of the records i.e., as per the order of the learned Sessions Judge, at paragraph 9, it is clear that the petitioners have promptly deposited an amount of Rs. 2,000/- within the stipulated time and thereafter, the court has issued summons to PWs.6 and 7 again and again. Particularly, the court has noted as many as 7 adjournments, for securing the presence of PWs.6 and 7. For various reasons, the court has re-issued the summons to PWs.6 and 7. Further, it is observed by the learned Sessions Judge that on those 7 occasions, Accused Nos.1 and 3 and their counsel were very much present in the court. However, on those days, PWs.6 and 7 were not present for cross examination as summons were being re-issued not served on them. On 15.5.2018, the witnesses were present on that day, unfortunately, the accused and their counsel remained absent. As such, the court has recorded that the accused persons have not availed the opportunity given to them. Therefore, the cross examination of PWs. 6 and 7 again was taken as Nil and posted the case by issuing NBW to the accused persons and thereafter, an application came to be filed for recalling of PWs.6 and 7 as noted above.