SNEHLATA GOEL Vs. CHANDRA MANI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 1.9.1992, passed by Addl. City Magistrate IV (Trans Gomti), Lucknow in case No. 39/53/79/133 of 1985 (now 3/92) under Section 145 Cr.P.C. permitting the opp. party No. 1 to lead evidence. It appears that in proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., evidence of the petitioners was recorded and the evidence of opposite party No. 1 was closed on account of his absence. An application for setting aside the order for closing the evidence was made by opposite party No. 1 praying that he be permitted to lead his evidence. This application was however, again rejected by order dated 6.9.1991 on account of absence of the opposite party No. 1. Another application was moved by the opposite party No. 2 on 13.9.1991. This application has been allowed by the learned Magistrate on payment of Rs. 250/ - as costs with the observation that refusing the prayer of the opposite party No. 1 may cause irreparable loss to him and the petitioners can be compensated with costs.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record and, in my opinion, the petition is devoid of merit. It is settled law that the powers of the court to examine any witness at any stage of the proceedings are quite wide. This is obvious from Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act as also Section 311 Cr.P.C. According to Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act the Judge may, in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts, ask any question he pleases, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties, about any fact relevant or irrelevant or Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceedings under this Code, summon any person as a witness or examine any person in attendance though not summoned as a witness, or recall and reexamine any person already examined and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re -examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential in just decision of the case.

(3.) IN Om Prakash Sharma v. Surendra Kumar and others : 1974 (11) ACC 42 this Court has held that a Magistrate is not precluded from examining certain witnesses under Section 540 under the Code of Criminal Procedure (1898) at a later stage.