VIJYADAS K. V. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An accused who is disgruntled with the proceedings before the trial court (Additional Assistant Sessions Court, Palakkad) where his case was re-opened suo motu for further examination of witnesses under Sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C') for more occasions than one, that too when posted for Judgment, is before this court with this petition under Sec. 482 of the Crimial P.C. to quash the order.

(2.) The accused in S.C.287/2008 including this petitioner(2nd accused ) are facing trial for having committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 341, 308 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').

(3.) The prosecution allegation against the accused in brief, is that on 15.8.2005 at about 20 hours, they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object to attack the de facto complainant, trespassed into a Tuition Centre known as 'Prathibha Tuition Centre', where he was conducting RSS Physical Training Camp and wrongfully restrained him and caused injuries with deadly weapons and attempted to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Before the trial court, PWs.1 to 7 were examined and the learned Public Prosecutor had given up CWs.3, 4 and 5. Thereafter, the prosecution closed the evidence and on 27.2012, the accused were questioned under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C and as there was no defence evidence, the case was posted for arguments and arguments were heard on 7.6.2012 after several postings. Then instead of pronouncing Judgment, on 26.6.2012, the evidence was re-opened suo motu and summons was ordered for examination of CWs. 3, 4 and 5 though they were earlier given up by the prosecution. CWs. 4 and 5 were examined as PWs. 7 and 9 and CWs.3, 8 & 10 were again given up by the prosecution. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused were recorded under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. and they denied the incriminating material against them. As there was no defence evidence, the case was adjourned for hearing to 1.12.2012 and it was adjourned further and finally it was heard on 15.2.2013 and the case was posted for pronouncing Judgment to 6.201 On 6.2013, the trial court again suo motu re-opened the evidence and ordered fresh summons to PWs.1 and 2.