(1.) THE respondent herein had filed a case in C.C.No.29 of 2003, on the file of District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai against 8 accused for the alleged offence under Section 494 r/w 109 I.P.C. All the accused were convicted after trial. Against the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.29 of 2003, dated 22.11.2007, the revision petitioner herein / A1 had filed a criminal appeal in C.A.No.252 of 2007, on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Erode. While the appeal was pending, the revision petitioner herein had filed Crl.R.C.No.531 of 2008, before this Court to transfer the above appeal to some other Court. Subsequently, the above said revision in Crl.R.C.No.531 of 2008 was dismissed by this Court on 28.02.2010.
(2.) THEREAFTER, the revision petitioner herein had filed Crl.M.P.No.30 of 2011, to recall the evidence of P.W.1. for further cross-examination. The petitioner has stated that the respondent / wife had alleged that the petitioner had married one Sumathi on 25.12.2002, during the subsistence of the marriage with her, which was intimated to her sister's husband viz., one Natesan on 11.01.2003, who in turn intimated the said marriage to her on 11.01.2003. But, when she was examined as P.W.1., in C.C.No.426 of 2004, on the file of District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, she had deposed that on 30.12.2002, the petitioner herein contacted her over phone from Anthaman and intimated that he married one other lady on 25.12.2002. The said contradictions have to be elicited. For that purpose, P.W.1 has to be recalled and she should be subjected to further cross-examination. The petitioner has produced certified copies of depositions of P.W.1. and P.W.2 in C.C.No.426 of 2004, on the file of District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perunthurai. The said petition was filed under Section 391 of Cr.P.C., to adduce further oral and documentary evidence.
(3.) AGGRIEVED by the dismissal of the said petition, the present revision has been preferred.