DILWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Informant has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, assailing the order dated 19.11.2015, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rurdraprayag in Sessions Trial No. 01 of 2015 under Sec. 120 -B, 302 & 201 IPC, whereby application moved by the informant under Sec. 311 of the Code to summon Tota Lal and Jaipal Lal for examination as prosecution witnesses was rejected. Undisputedly, Tota Lal S/o. Jhhagadu Lal and Jaipal Lal S/o. Chhavi Lal are not cited as witness in the charge -sheet; in their statement recorded under Sec. 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure, it is nowhere stated that they have witnessed the incident of murder.

(2.) In a criminal trial, ordinarily, for the offence against the society, learned prosecutor is the only authorised person to conduct the trial at the best of his ability. Complainant, if so permitted, can only assist the prosecutor. Ordinarily, complainant has no right to intervene during the trial.

(3.) Sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under: