STATE OF BOMBAY Vs. JANARDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Sessions Judge of Nagpur has made this reference under S. 438, Cr. P. C. recommending that the order of Magistrate 1st Class, Saoner, rejecting an applcatin made by the complainant in a case against five accused persons underf Ss. 494 and 494 read with S. 109, I. P. C. to examine additional witnesses to prove that subsequent to the date of the second bigamous marriage of Guna, a child was born to Guna & his second wife Milibai, on the ground that under S. 256, Cr. P. C. after the framing of the charge, the complainant could examine only such of the witnesses as had remained unexamined out of the list of witnesses given by the complainant. the learned Sessions Judge, however, took a different view and relying on Emperor v. Nagindas, AIR 1942, held that the words "any remaining witnesses" in S. 256, Criminal Procedure Code, are nor restricted to witnesses lef out from the list of witnesses given by the complainant and has made this reference to set aside the order of the magistrate.

(2.) The question for determinuation I the meaning of the expression "any remaining witnesses" in S. 256, Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) The material poertions of the relevant Ss. 252 and 256 are as follows: