CHHOTEY BADRI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by Chhotey, resident of Mohalla Madhiya, Naka, police station Kotwali Nagar, district Banda, to set aside the order dated 30.9.2005 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Banda, in S.T. No. 254 of 2003, State v. Shobhit Chaturvedi and Ors. whereby application 186 Kha moved by the accused Applicant was rejected and objection 188 Kha filed by learned D.G.C. (criminal) against the application 186 Kha was allowed. Application 186 Kha was moved to recall the order dated 26.7.2005 whereby the learned Sessions Judge suo-motu directed PW 6 Siraj Ahmad, Investigating Officer to be reexamined on some points.

(2.) Heard Sri K.S. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and have gone through the record.

(3.) The fact of the case is that S.T. No. 254 of 2003, State v. Shobhit Chaturvedi and Ors. is pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Banda, under Section 302/34 I.P.C. police station Kotwali Nagar, Banda, against the accused persons including accused Chhotey, applicant. After the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Prosecution examined its fact and formal witnesses. The statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The defence also closed its evidence and thereafter the trial was fixed for argument. During the argument it was found by the learned Sessions Judge that report about the death of Awadhesh @ Pota was sent from the District Hospital, Banda, to the police station Kotwali, which was registered at G.D. Report No. 9 of 6.8.2003 at 8.00 P.M. The G.D. report was not proved by the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge during the course of argument feit that examination of Investigating officer Siraj Ahmad, PW 6 was necessary. He also found that statement of constable concerned, who carried the information etc. was also necessary as perusal of GD in evidence was relevant for disposal of the trial. Therefore, he directed for reexamination of PW 6 Siraj Ahmad, Investigating Officer, on this point and also the statement of the constable concerned. Aggrieved there from the applicant - accused moved application to recall the order dated 26.7.2005, which was opposed by the learned D.G.C. (criminal). After hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties the learned Sessions Judge rejected the prayer of the accused-applicant on 30.9.2005, therefore, instant application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved.