MITHUN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant Mithun alias Shamshad was arrested by the Bahodapur police on or about 10-6-1985 in crime No. 135/85 registered initially under S.307/34 I.P.C. on 6-6-1985 in respect of a transaction in which one Madan @ Pappoo had received injuries from others. Pappoo died from the injuries on 12-6-1985. The case was converted into one under S.302 I.P.C.

(2.) The challan was filed in the month of Sept. '85. The charge of murder was framed on 31-10-1985. Out of a list of 20 prosecution witnesses so far only six have been examined. In criminal misc. case No. 1214/86 decided on 17-10-1986. This Court rejected there preceding bail application with the following observations :-

(3.) Now, what happened in the sequel is as follows : - On 21-10-1986 no prosecution witnesses were in attendance. On 22-10-1986 one Rambabu's cross-examination was concluded. Then P.W.7 Kanhaiya was examined and discharged. A reference was made to 4 other witnesses. It was said that one Bodharam had died while Anilkumar and Kalloo and one Gita were absent. It was also observed that the summonses issued for service on Anilkumar and Kalloo had not been received back. The learned Public Prosecutor's prayer to produce these witnesses on the next working day was granted. On 23-10-1986 Gita was examined and discharged, but, Anil and Kalloo remained absent. They were ordered to be summoned, and the case was adjourned to 24-10-1986 for remaining witnesses but without having ordered them to be summoned. On 24-10-1986 prosecution witnesses were absent. The Court ordered the prosecutor to keep witnesses in attendance or get them summoned. The case was adjourned to 28-10-1986. The applicant's learned counsel states that on 28-10-1986 no prosecution witnesses were examined. On 29-10-1986 there were no prosecution witnesses. The case was adjourned to 14-11-1986, when only Head Constable Onkarnath Pandey was in attendance who could not be examined in the absence of some record. What was that record is not disclosed in the order sheet. Other witnesses were absent. The Prosecutor prayed for time and the learned trial Judge gave it, and the case now stands adjourned to 29-11-1986. The order sheet does not show the number and the names of the witnesses against whom warrants of arrest bailable in the sum of Rs. 50/- were to be issued.