MOHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred against the order dated 9.1.92 passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Vidisha in S.T. No. 92 of 1982.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the prosecution has closed its evidence in the month of December, 1991. The petitioners submitted an application 21.11.91 requesting to summon some document and also six witnesses. The trial Court directed that the witnesses and the documents be summoned on payment of p. f. and expensed besides diet money. The petitioners requested the trial Court to issue summons without payment of p.f. and diet money but the learned trial Court rejected the application and directed that the petitioners should pay p.f. and expenses besides diet money.

(3.) 1968 JLJ 530 (Kadu v. Banmalt) it was held by the High Court of M.P. that : -