BHAGTU MUNDA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 17.03.2010 and order on sentence dated 22.03.2010. The case of the prosecution as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is as under:-

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that grave procedural irregularities have been committed during the trial which has caused serious prejudice to the appellant in defending himself. It is submitted that between 06.02.2006 and 08.05.2006 lawyers were abstaining from work in the District Courts and during this period PW-

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submits that with respect to the circumstance of last seen the prosecution has placed strong reliance and sought to prove the said circumstance on the basis of the testimony of the hotel employees where the appellant and the deceased had last stayed including PW-3 Puran Singh, PW-6 Bhajan Lal and PW-15 Gopal Singh. The prosecution has also relied on the handwriting expert to show that the entry contained in the hotel register is in the handwriting of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the opinion of the handwriting expert cannot be believed for another reason that there is no opinion on documents A-4 and A-6 which were also sent to the handwriting expert for opinion and in their absence the entire report is inadmissible.