MANMOHAN LAL SACHDEVA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition undersection 482, Criminal Procedure Code (for the short "Code") petitioners/accused have been challenging the order dated 4.12.1998 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, allowing the Counsel for the complainant to address arguments at the instructions from A.P.P., in-charge of the case.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that under Sub-section (2) of Section 301 of the Code, Counsel engaged by a private party may, with the permission of the Court submit written arguments after the evidence is closed in the case. Referring to Section 225 of the Code, it has been submitted that in every trial before a Court of Sessions, the prosecution shall be conducted by a Public Prosecutor.

(3.) Mr. Butalia, learned APP, does not dispute the proposition of law that the private Counsel engaged bya complainant cannot address arguments before the Court, but has to assist the Public Prosecutor in-charge of the trial and at the most can submit written arguments, as provided under Sub-section (2) of Section 301 of the Code.