LAWS(MAD)-2009-4-280

STATE Vs. M GOPALAKRISHNAN

Decided On April 30, 2009
STATE Appellant
V/S
M. GOPALAKRISHNAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Petition has been preferred against the against the Order, dated 16.03.2007 made in Crl.M.P.No.391 of 2006 in C.C.No.17 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai.

(2.) THE case has been filed against the respondents under Sections 420 r/w 120 (B), 409, 467, 468 IPC and Section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. It is not in dispute that it is a part-heard case, pending before the court below. One Mr.V.Ramanan, who was the General Manager, Indian Bank, retired in the year 2003 was examined as P.W.2 before the court below. According to the petitioner, the said witness, P.W.2 had deposed his evidence in chief, supporting the prosecution case, however, turned hostile, while he was cross-examined by the third respondent / A3. Since P.W.2 deposed evidence, during cross-examination against the prosecution case and in favour of the third respondent / A3, learned Public Prosecutor requested the court below, to treat him hostile, but the request was negatived by the trial court.

(3.) MR. Sundar Mohan, learned counsel appearing for R1 submitted that as per the impugned order, P.W.2 has not exhibited any element of hostility and therefore, there was no necessity to treat him hostile by the prosecution. Learned counsel appearing for R1 and also R3, who appeared party-in-person, drew the attention of this Court to paragraph number 18 and other paragraphs of the impugned order. Paragraph 18 of the orders reads as follows: