HADIBANDHU MISRA Vs. KING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is by the complainant. He feels aggrieved by the order of the trying Magistrate (Shri S. S. Roy) refusing to examine some more witnesses for the prosecution at the stage of the trial where Section 256, Criminal P. C., came into operation.

(2.) THE facts are that after a long and chequered career, the criminal case started by the petitioner, came to the file of Sri S. S. Roy for disposal. On the date, he received the file, he asked the complainant (petitioner) to produce his witnesses on the following date, on the said date, that is 19th August 1948, the complainant could not be present in Court and an application for excusing his absence was filed. At his instance, the case was adjourned, but the complainant was required to file a list of witnesses within two days. Thereupon, three witnesses were summoned for the prosecution and were present in Court on the next date. They were examined and (partially) cross -examined before the charge was framed. After charge, they were further cross -examined and discharged. The accused was asked to plead. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. He was asked to produce his witnesses on the next date. On that very day, prosecution asked for leave to summon some more witnesses. This was disallowed with the following observations of the Magistrate :

(3.) THE necessary research for pragmatic treatment of the subject adopted by the Lahore High Court should be carried a little further in order to reach a more convincing result, particularly so, as it has given a contrary indication to what would result from giving a full plain grammatical meaning to the words 'any remaining witnesses shall next be taken up.' The words 'any remaining witnesses' are very wide, but it is sought to be limited to these only that have been named under Section 262 (2) but not examined so far. My first objection to this construction is that if it were so intended, the words 'the remaining witnesses' instead of 'any remaining witnesses' should have been used. It cannot be presumed or pre -supposed that the draftsman should commit a grammatical mistake such as that unless he had an intention to convey a wider meaning. Witnesses for the prosecution would be those that are acquainted with the facts of the prosecution case and are able to give evidence for it of them such as have not been examined till then shall necessarily be 'remaining witnesses' The object of using 'any' instead of 'the' is to widen rather than to limit the meaning of the words that follow.