ANGADH ROHIDAS KADAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

(2.) BY way of present application, the applicant challenges the order passed by the learned Ad hoc additional Sessions Judge, Gangakhed, dated 4th September 2006, below Exhibit 51 in Sessions Trial No. 6/2006, thereby rejecting the application of the applicants / accused for direction to the prosecution to produce statements of Dadarao Marotrao Kadam, Bapurao Dnyandeo kadam, Kusumbai Bapurao Kadam and Dadarao Limbaji Kadam, recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(3.) THE factual background, in short, giving rise to the present petition is as under :-The applicants are facing trial in Sessions trial No. 6/2006 before the Ad hoc Additional Sessions judge, Gangakhed, for the offence punishable under sections 498-A, 304-B read with Section 34 of the Indian penal Code, arising out of Crime No. 66/2005 registered at Police Station, Palam (Taluka Palam, District Parbhani ). During the course of trial, the prosecution examined Police Inspector, Mukund Kewle, who is the investigating Officer, as prosecution witness no. 6. In his cross examination, he has deposed thus :