MOHAMED ALI K M Vs. ASSISTANT CIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging the order permitting the complainant to examine certain witnesses on the grounds that such course has to be resorted to only after letting in evidence and invited my attention to the decision of this court in Srinivasan R. v. G. Shanmugha Vaduvu [1983] LW (Crl.) 355. That was a case instituted on a private complaint. In that case, the complainant file a petition under section 311, Criminal Procedure Code, praying for examining a person as a court witness. In such a situation, this court took the view that it is mandatory to form an opinion that the new evidence appears to be essential and just for the decision of the court. But, in the instant case, an additional list of witness has been given by the complainant who seeks for issuance of summons. Section 244, Criminal Procedure Code, contemplates that the magistrate shall proceed to hear the prosecution and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution and the magistrate may, on the application of the prosecution, issue a summons to any of its witnesses directing him to attend or to produce any document or other thing. This court in Vivekanantham v. Viswanathan [1976] LW (Crl.) 215 has taken the view that the restricted meanings of section 244, Criminal Procedure Code, will defeat the very ends of justice and observed that section 244, Criminal Procedure Code, is wide enough to give power to a court to accept a supplemental or additional list of witnesses given by a complainant and to issue summons to them and record their evidence. All that the section says is that... "the Magistrate shall proceed to hear the prosecution and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution". Accepting the contention of the petitioner amounts to narrowing the scope of section 244, Criminal Procedure Code, and would actually lead to grave injustice and hardship to the complainants. I see no ground to set aside the proceedings. THE petitions are, therefore, dismissed.

(2.) CONSEQUENTLY, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 3127 to 3129 of 1994 are also dismissed.