RATI PAL SAROJ Vs. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the orders dated 3rd November, 2011 and 2nd February, 2012 dismissing the prayer of the Petitioner to recall PW-29 and consequential relief of recalling PW-29 Shri S.L. Mukhi, the handwriting expert for further cross-examination on behalf of the Petitioner.

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts giving rise to the filing of the present petition are that the Petitioner is facing trial in RC No. 4/86 ACU-II for offences under Section 120B/420/468/471 IPC and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(C)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. During the trial PW- 29 S.L. Mukhi was examined as the hand-writing expert. Examination-in- chief of Shri S.L. Mukhi was concluded on 7th February, 2011 and on the said date on the request of the defence counsel the matter was deferred for cross-examination of this witness for 8th March, 2011. On 8th March this witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, however the further cross-examination was deferred as the counsel had to go On 20th May, 2011 the counsel for the to another Court after lunch. Petitioner was not well and thus the matter was deferred to 4 th July, 2011. Again on 4th July, 2011 after half page cross-examination was conducted by the defence counsel the matter was adjourned to 19 th August, 2011 when again part cross-examination was conducted and deferred to 19th August, 2011 and 30th August, 2011 when this witness was subjected to lengthy cross-examinations. The next date was fixed for 19th September, 2011 when the witness was present but had to be discharged as the counsel for the Petitioner was not present. On 20th September, 2011 again the witness was present but the defence counsel was not present and an application was filed that the defence counsel is unwell. On 3rd November, 2011 again the witness was present, however the defence counsel was not present as he was again unwell and thus the learned Special Judge passed the order that the cross- examination of witness qua the Petitioner was considered to be complete.

(3.) WITH these directions petition is disposed of.