RAM SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition challenge has been made to an order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, in permitting the Public Prosecutor to examine more prosecution evidence, after its closure. The order having afflicted the rights of the accused prejudicially, has given cause to him to approach this Court.

(2.) TRIAL against the accused under section 9 of the Opium Act was in process. On 9.7.1979, affidavit dated 15.11.1978, Exhibit PY, of Rameshwar Dass, Moharrir Head Constable and affidavit dated 15.11.1978. Exhibit PY, of Hukam Chand Constable were tendered in evidence by the Public Prosecutor. Later on 23.1.1980, he made a statement which reads as under: -

(3.) THERE is no better principle for the guidance of the Court, than the one, that no act of Court should harm a litigant, and it is the bounden duty of the Court to see that if a person is harmed by the mistake of the Court, he should be restored to the position he would have occupied but for that mistake This is amply summed up in the maxim "actus curiae neminem gravabit."