BIGAN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 3.6.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in G.R No. 2249 of 1996 arising out of Burmu P.S.Case No.38 of 1996, for the offence under Sections 25(1)(b)/26 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the charge in the instant case was framed as back as on 18.2.1999 and thereafter, the witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. It is also submitted that the prosecution case was closed on 19.11.1999 directing the petitioner to be present for examination under Section 313 of the Cr PC. But, the prosecution filed a petitioner under Section 311, Cr PC on 10.12.1999 for examination of the witnesses and the said petition was allowed. Thereafter, PW 2 Jethu Mahto was examined on 4.1.2000 and thereafter, the prosecution was given sufficient time but no witness was examined and thus the prosecution case was closed and the statement under Section 313, Cr PC was recorded and the case was fixed for judgment on 16.5.2000 on which date the prosecution again filed a petition under Section 311, Cr PC for re-opening of the case as well as the name of witness to be examined was not mentioned in the petition. It is further argued that the petitioners are attending the Court also since long and the prosecution has been filing such petitioner in order to delay in disposal of the case and such vague petition cannot be allowed to fill up lacuna and therefore the impugned order is fit to be quashed. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a case (Pat)(Keshav Chowdhary and others V/s. State of Bihar,2000 1 EastCriC 630)