(1.) THIS is an application under Section 526, Cr. P. C. to transfer G. R. Case No. 1/62 pending in the Court of Sri T. V. Rao, Special Judge, Puri, to some other Court competent to try the case.
(2.) THE opposite parties were prosecuted for having committed various offences under the Indian Penal Code and under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case dragged on for several years and the prosecution case was closed on 26-9-1966. Thereafter the case was adjourned to 1-11-1966 for defence. On 16-11-1966 the trial was resumed when the accused G. A. N. Rajan offered himself to be examined as a defence witness. On that day, it is alleged by the prosecution that he made reference to a private note book and practically read out his deposition verbatim from the said book. To this, objection is said to have been raised by the special public Prosecutor, but the Court did not exercise any check on the witness who continued this process throughout his deposition. The grievance of the prosecution is that even if the matter was brought to the notice of the Court, the Court did not restrain the witness from using the said note book in that way. Their other ground is that the defence did not give a list of witnesses and the documents sought to be relied upon by them before they entered upon the defence as required under the provisions of Section 7 (A) (a) of act 40 of 1964 read with Sub-section (8) of Section 251-A, Cr. P. C. , but furnished such a list only after the commencement of the defence evidence. It is said that though the matter was brought to the notice of the Court the Court allowed the defence to proceed with the evidence without giving sufficient time and opportunity to the prosecution to get instructions in respect of those documents.
(3.) MR. M. N. Das, appearing for the opposite party contended that the accused who offered himself to be examined as D. W. 1 never used any such note book as is alleged by the Public Prosecutor. With respect to the other allegation his contention is that shortly after the closure of the prosecution case the accused gave a list of documents on 26-9-1966. He, however, did not deny the fact that the accused Rajan who offered to examine himself as a defence witness (D. W. 1)furnished a further list of documents even after the commencement of his examination.