RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. Through this application under Section 482, Cr PC an order dated 21-8-98 recorded by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Etah, in S. T. No. 424 of 1998 is sought to be quashed.

(2.) THE order indicates that the com plainant Rajesh Kumar had appeared in the Sessions trial through his counsel Sri M. P. S. Rana, Advocate and the complain ant desired that Sri Rana should be al lowed to act on behalf of the prosecution in that trial. It was stated that during the examiantion-in-chief of PW-2 Ram Nath Singh the court had stopped Sri Rana to conduct the examiantion-in-chief. THE court had heard both the parties. Undoubt edly, prosecution was to be conducted by Sri B. N. Dixit, Assistant District Gov ernment Counsel (Criminal ). No permis sion was granted by Sr. B. N. Dixit to Sri M. P. S. Rana to conduct the case and the court had opined that Sri Rana had no right to conduct the examination-in- chief of the prosecution witnesses. It was, how ever, submitted on behalf of the privately engaged counsel that the court had chas tised PW-2 which was an interference in the conduct of a case. It was further stated on his behalf that the District Magistrate and S. S. P. had requested Sri M. P. S. Rana to conduct the prosecution. It was between the prosecutor and the private counsel and the court had nothing to say in the matter. With reference to Section 301 (2), Cr PC it was contended that the complainant had every right to engage a private counsel and he could have acted only under the direc tion of the public prosecutor and when the public prosecutor conceded to his so act ing, the court could not take exception to it.

(3.) SECTION 301, Cr PC falls under Chapter XXIV dealing with general pro visions as to enquiry and trial. Under Sec tion 301, Cr PC it is provided that the public prosector or assistant public prose cutor in charge of a case may appear and plead without any written authority before any court in whch that case is under in quiry, trial or appeal. Then comes 301 (2), Cr PC which states that if in any such case any private person instructs a pleader to prosecute any person in any court, the public prosecutor shall conduct the prose cution and the pleader so instructed shall act therein under the directions of the public prosecutor and may with the per mission of the court, submit written argu ments after the evidence is closed in the case.