SHIVCHARAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT Shivcharan has filed Criminal Revision No. 119/09 aggrieved by the order dated 30-1 -2009 passed by First additional Sessions Judge, Guna in Ses-sions Trial No. 99/08, whereby ordered for rejection of the written statement filed by the applicant/accused under the provisions of Section 233 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) MISC. Cri. Case No. 1 107/09 has been filed by the defence counsel of the applicant/ accused, aggrieved by the remark made by the trial Court against the defence counsel prem Kumar Sood in the aforesaid order dated 30-1 -2009 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Guna.

(34.) AS in both these cases the impugned order dated 30-1-2009 passed by the trial court is under challenge, hence both these matters are being decided commonly by this common order. Sessions Trial No. 99/08 pending before the First Additional Sessions judge, Guna. On 30-1-2009 the case was fixed for recording of the statement of the accused under the provisions of Section 313, cr. P. C. After the statement of the accused counsel for the applicant has filed written statement of the accused under the provisions of Section 233 (2), Cr. P. C. after taking signatures of the applicant before the court. At that time learned trial Court as read over the statement filed by the accuse as written statement and made certain emarks against the defence counsel that he h d got signatures of the accused without reading the written statement to the accused and also gave a finding that this written statement cannot be looked into as per the provisions of Section 233 (2), Cr. P. C. Aggrieved by the uncalled remarks made by the trial court against the defence counsel and against the finding that the aforesaid statement cannot be looked into by the trial court, the applicant came up before this court by this revision/petition.