SINGARAVELU Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER KADAMPULLIYUR POLICE STATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 21.03.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Panruti, Cuddalore District in Crl.M.P.No,3309 of 2006 in C.C.No,650 of 2005, this revision is focussed.

(2.) A -resume- of facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition would run thus:The learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed application under Section 137 of the Indian Evidence Act for recalling P.W.1 in C.C.No,650 of 2005, so as to mark the M.O., so to say, the weapon of offence. Whereupon, the accused filed objection on the ground that even while P.W.1 was earlier examined before the Court, the weapon was not identified by him and in order to fill up the lacuna, once again he cannot be recalled for the purpose of getting that weapon marked. The learned Magistrate after hearing both sides passed order recalling P.W.1 so as to enable him to get marked the M.O., as requested by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(3.) DESPITE printing the name of the learned counsel for the petitioner, none appeared. Heard the learned Government Advocate (crl.side).