ASHOK GHANSHYAM KAMBLE Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are facing trial under sections 7, 12, 13(l)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act being Special Case No. 4 of 2005 before the learned Special Judge for C.B.I, at Akola.

(2.) It is noticed that some evidence came to be recorded in the said case and original accused No. 2 i.e. respondent No. 3 filed an application at Exh. 90 before the learned Special Judge praying that the present petitioner should be joined as accused on the basis of evidence which was then before the learned Special Judge. That application was heard by the learned Special Judge on merits. Opportunity was given to the present applicant to advance his submission in connection with the prayer set out in Exh. 90. The learned Special Judge at Akola by his order dated 7/12/ 2007 granted the request of joining the present applicant as accused No. 3 and certain other orders were passed. This order dated 7/12/ 2007 is challenged in this petition.

(3.) I have heard learned Advocates on both sides. It was sought to be argued in principle by the learned Advocate for the applicant that provisions of section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should have been invoked by the prosecutor by filing application and thereafter the Court should have decided the said matter. According to the learned Advocate for the applicant, it will not be open for a person who is shown as accused (in a pending case) to make an application that a particular person shouldbe joined as an accused by using the provisions of section 319 Cri.P.C. He, therefore, submitted that the order passed by the learned Special Judge is patently incorrect, and therefore, it should be set aside.