BHUSHANTHAPAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The conspectus of the facts, which needs a necessary mention, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and oozing out, from the record, is that, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused, vide FIR No. 244 dated 20.7.2002, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 411 and 420 IPC by the police of Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. Having completed all the codal formalities, the evidence of the prosecution was closed. Thereafter, the petitioner-accused examined Amarjit Singh, retired SI as DW7 on 9.1.2010, but he abruptly left the Court and was not subjected to cross-examination. He even did not sign his statement of examination-in-chief. Finding no alternative, petitioner-accused moved an application (Annexure P1) for re-summoning and recalling the retired SI Amarjit Singh (DW7) to prove the documents mentioned therein. His prayer was refuted and the prosecution filed the reply (Annexure P2) to the application.

(2.) The trial Magistrate dismissed the application (Annexure P1), by way of impugned order dated 17.3.2012 (Annexure P3).

(3.) The petitioner did not feel satisfied and preferred the present petition challenging the impugned order (Annexure P3), invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C.