SUDARSHAN LAL MEHTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I am afraid this revision has to be allowed.

(2.) A case against the applicant Under Section 302 IPC is pending enquiry in the court of the Addl. Distt. Magistrate (Judicial), Meerut. The prosecution examined P.Ws. Hardwari and Nanoo in support of its case. These witnesses are alleged to have filed affidavits before the predecessor of the present Addl. Distt. Magistrate (Judicial), Meerut, stating that they did not know anything about the case and were being pressed by the police to give false evidence on behalf of the prosecution. While in the witness box, these affidavits were put to the aforesaid witnesses in cross examination and they stated that their signatures or thumb impressions were obtained on blank pieces of paper by one Girdhari Lal, brother of the applicant; and that they had - not sworn the contents of the affidavits read out to them in the court. It was under these circumstances that the applicant had moved an application before the enquiring Magistrate seeking to examine the then Addl. Distt. Magistrate (Judicial), his Ahalmad and the Advocate, who had identified the deponents, at the time of the verification of their affidavits. The enquiring Magistrate, rejected the said application of the Petitioner, which order was upheld by the Sessions Judge in revision; hence the Petitioner has come up in revision to this Court.

(3.) THE revision is accordingly allow -ed, the orders of the courts below being set aside. The enquiring Magistrate shall summon the then Addl. Distt. Magistrate (Judicial) Shri Shafiqul Hasan (now posted at Kanpur) as well as his Ahalmad Jai Dutt and Shri Shyam Prakash Sharma, Advocate who is said to have identified the two prosecution witnesses.