NAVEEN CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Srivastava, for the revisionist, Mr. Manmohan Singh and the learned A.G.A. for the opposite party.

(2.) This is a revision against the order dated 28.8.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ballia in S.T. No. 459 of 2004, State v. Kamlakant Chaubey and Ors. whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the revisionist's application for summoning witnesses under Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').

(3.) In the application moved under Section 233 of the Code the revisionist made first prayer for summoning record of the departmental inquiry held against the S.H.O. Ram Prakash Bajpai, Sub-Inspector Vinod Kumar and constables Lalta Prasad, Pradeep Kumar Rai and Amar Nath. It was contended in this regard that these persons had stated during the inquiry that they were not present at the police station at the time of the incident but during the trial they have stated otherwise. The other prayer of the revisionist was for summoning the record relating to the grant of fire arm licences in favour of Kamal Singh, Akhilesh Singh, Arvind Singh and Daya Shankar Singh. The aforesaid application was moved by the revisionist in pursuance of the directions of this Court in Criminal Revision No. 2557/2010. This Court, while dismissing the said revision, observed that even at the later stage, if the defence moves an application to adduce any kind of evidence which is relevant the same may be considered and suitable orders may be passed in the ends of justice.