DEV PARKASH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner impugns the order of the trial Magistrate dated July 3, 1986, whereby he has allowed the prosecution to lead additional evidence under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as he formed the opinion that the examination of that evidence appeared "to be essential for the just decision of the case".

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts are that the evidence of the prosecution in the case under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867, was closed by the Court vide its order dated June 13, 1986. The reason stated in the order was that the prosecution had failed to produce A.S.I. Daljit Singh and Head Constable Ram Singh without any sufficient cause on the said date. The learned Public Prosecutor filed the present application on the same day with the plea that the above -noted order closing the evidence of the prosecution was passed in his absence as he was busy conducting cases in other Court and it was factually wrong in the sense that Head Constable Ram Singh was present in the Court but the Court failed to record his evidence. This application of the Public Prosecutor was taken up for hearing on July 3, 1986, after notice to the learned counsel for the accused. After hearing the learned counsel, the Court as has already been noted above, allowed the examination of the said witnesses.

(3.) THE primary submission of Mr. Amarjit Markan, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Court having closed the evidence of the prosecution vide order dated June 13, 1986, should not have allowed the prosecution to lead the same very evidence which had been shut out by that order. I, however, see no merit in the submission of the learned counsel in view of the detailed reasons given in the impugned order. As has been pointed out above, the Court thought it proper to examine those two witnesses who were present in Court on July 3, 1986, in the interest of justice and for a just decision of the case. This petition thus fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.