JANESHWAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. K. Chaturvedi, J. Affidavit filed in support of the revision is taken on record.

(2.) THIS revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 26-4-2001 passed by the IInd Addl. Session Judge, Muzaf-farnagarin S. T. No. 1409 of 1997, rejecting the application filed by the revisionists under Sec tion 311 Cr. P. C. for summoning RW 3 and P. W 4 for cross-examination.

(3.) SESSIONS trial No. 1409 of 1997 is pending before Ilnd Addl. SESSIONS Judge, Muzaffarnagar. On 13-12- 2000 P. W. 3, Radhey and P. W. 4 Sugna were present in the Court and their examination in chief was recorded and on that day an applica tion was moved by Km. Rehka Rani Advo cate representing the accused that senior Counsel had gone out of the station, there fore, she is unable to cross- examine the witnesses. The request of the Counsel for the accused was conceded and the case was adjourned. Thereafter 15-12-2000 was fixed/6ut some of the accused deliberately disappeared to avoid the cross- examina tion of these two witnesses and conse quently non-bailable warrant was issued. On 23-1-2001 again an application was moved that the Counsel could not inspect the file, therefore, the case be adjourned and the case was again adjourned. On 13-2-2001, the witnesses were present and the Counsel for the accused moved an applica tion for adjournment which was rejected. It is, therefore, apparent that whenever the witnesses appeared for being cross-ex amined then adjournment application is moved. This has caused unnecessary harassment to the witnesses.