RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Taken up in the revised list but none turned up for the revisionist to press this revision on the point of admission. Learned A.G.A. is present. I have heard him and with his assistance, I perused the materials available before me including the order impugned dated 6.10.2007.

(2.) This Criminal Revision u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionist Raj Kumar challenging the impugned order dated 6.10.2007, passed by learned trial court in S.T. No.13 of 2005 (State Vs. Ram Rishi Pal and others), whereby learned trial court has dismissed the application of the informant revisionist Raj Kumar made u/s 311 Cr.P.C. to summon two persons, namely, Ajit Dubey and Krishna Kant Agrawal and examine them as witnesses. The application was opposed on the ground that none of these persons were cited as prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet. The proceeding of the trial was fixed for examining the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. because all the prosecution witnesses have already been examined but none of such witnesses examined, have thrown any light on the fact that aforesaid two persons, Ajit Dubey and Krishna Kant Agrawal, had seen the incident of murder of the brother of the informant and thereafter throwing the dead body in the bush, which was recovered on 23.8.2004, from the bush.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, learned trial court rejected the said application made u/s 311 Cr.P.C. on the ground that even at an earlier occasion on 20.7.2007, informant Raj Kumar had made an application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. to summon Shyam Singh and examine him. The said application was allowed by the court and Shyam Singh was summoned. His evidence was recorded in the court and thereafter all other witnesses of the prosecution have been examined. The date is fixed for examining the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. It is at this stage, as a means of delaying tactics, this application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. appears to have been made by the informant to summon the aforesaid two persons Ajit Dubey and Krishna Kant Agrawal to examine them on the ground that they have seen the incident. Since neither I.O. cited them as prosecution witnesses nor first informant Raj Kumar has ever deposed that these two persons have seen the incident nor there is any source of information that these witnesses have witnessed the incident and they are the witnesses of an eye account, hence, concluding that there was no justification to summon Ajit Dubey and Krishna Kant Agrawal as witnesses, rejected the application given u/s 311 Cr.P.C., vide order dated 6.10.2007.