MOGILI AJAY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the Order dtd. 29/4/2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.1010 of 2022 in C.C.No.3042 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (P&E)-cum-VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate & VIII Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam.

(2.) The petitioners herein are accused 4 to 6 in the above referred Calendar Case, which was registered for the offence under Sec. 34(a) of A.P.Excise(Amendment) Act, 2020. They filed the above mentioned Miscellaneous Petition seeking to recall P.Ws.1 to 4 as the counsel for the petitioners could not cross examine the said witnesses. The respondent-State opposed the said petition and by the impugned Order, the same was dismissed. Hence, the present quash petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the counsel for the petitioners/accused 4 to 6 appearing in the Trial Court was suffering from ligament injuries and therefore, he could not attend the Court, as a result of which, cross examination of P.Ws.1 to 4 could not be conducted. The learned counsel submits that in fact the prosecution witnesses were not present on several dates, though the petitioners' counsel was ready to examine them and ignoring the said aspect, the learned Magistrate went wrong in observing that no cross examination was done by the petitioners. Be that as it may. The learned counsel would submit that cross examination of the above said witnesses is very much essential and the learned Trial Court without appreciating the matter in a proper perspective, went wrong in dismissing the petition by making certain observations, contrary to the material on record. He submits that the petitioners/accused are denied a fair opportunity to establish their case by cross examining the witnesses and unless the witnesses are cross examined, the petitioners would not be in a position to establish their innocence.