SANJIV RAJENDRA BHATT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer is made to examine the correctness, legality and propriety of order below Exhibits-648 and 649 dtd. 13/4/2023, impugned in Criminal Revision Application No.534 of 2023 and Exhibit-725, dtd. 27/4/2023, impugned in Criminal Revision Application No.541 of 2023 passed by the 3rdAdditional Sessions Judge and Special Judge [NDPS Act], Banaskantha, Dist. - Palanpur in Special [NDPS] Case No.3 of 2018, and accordingly prayed to quash and set aside the same.

(2.) Mr. A.J. Yagnik, learned advocate for the applicant stated the list of about 69 witnesses were provided by the prosecution and out of those, 19 were examined, while 50 were dropped. He submits that at the stage of defence, an application was moved with a list on 6/4/2023 by the present applicant to examine about 19 witnesses. Mr. Yagnik submitted that permission to examine four witnesses were granted, and out of them, one has died; while one turned hostile, and the permission for examination of one was with qualification that he could be only contradicted and another witness prayed for is a accused turned approver, which was rejected. Mr. Yagnik stated that F.S.L. officer, Mr. M.P. chaudhry, listed at serial no.7, was also not granted permission for examination; thus stated that as a right of fair trial equal opportunity is required to be granted to both the sides.

(3.) While countering the argument, Mr. Mitesh Amin, learned Public Prosecutor stated that, while after examining 19 witnesses, a closure pursis was filed, and an application justifying the reason for dropping witnesses was filed by the prosecution, and thereafter, the matter was posted for further statement on 29/3/2023 of the accused. Mr. Amin stated that initially one whatsapp list to examine four witnesses was placed, but later on the accused disowned stating that he had not given any such instruction to his Advocate.