PONNUSAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision filed under Secs. 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Erode, in Cr1. M.P. No. 20 of 1993 in Sessions Case No. 193 of 1992 dated 11.3.1993, rejecting the prayer of the accused made in the above criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Short facts which led to the filing of this revision may be stated as follows: Petitioner herein, being accused in the above sessions case, for offences under Sees. 302 and 379, I.P.C. was facing trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and during the course of which, 8 witnesses were examined. After their examination, the accused, who is the revision petitioner herein, filed a petition under Sec. 319 of the Code before the trial court for the arrest of the witnesses Mohan and Subban, who were also stated as prosecution witnesses in this case, since the evidence let in by the prosecution so far implicates the said persons also for the offences charged. It was objected to on behalf of the prosecution, namely, the State, by the Inspector of Police, Sathiyamangalam.

(3.) P.Ws. 1 and 2 by name Rengasamy and Masa Gounder are the father of deceased Sivaraj and husband of the deceased Kanniammal respectively. Their evidence before the trial court, was that the revision petitioner was in no way connected with the charge framed against him and that witnesses Mohan figuring as witness number 26, who was the Forest Guard along with Subban Forest Watcher, figuring as witness number 15 in the charge-sheet had committed the offence of murder and theft and not the present accused! revision petitioner herein.