UDAY BHANU SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 18.12.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Munger, in Cr. Revision No. 459 of 2003, allowing the revision preferred by opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 and setting aside the order dated 22.8.2003 passed by Shri R. Malviya, Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Class, Munger, in G.R. Case No. 91/99 arising out of Dharhara PS Case No. 7/99 by which he allowed the petition dated 31.7.2003 filed on behalf of the prosecution under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr PC) and directed the prosecution to produce its witnesses within three days on payment of cost of Rs. 200/- to defence.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner lodged a written report addressed to Officer-in-charge of Dharhara PS on 21.1.1999 against opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 for the allegation of assault and damage to the boundary and plants of guava and mango of his courtyard. On the basis of this report, Dharhara PS Case No. 7/99 was registered. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet and learned CJM by his order dated 11.10.1999 took cognizance of the offences under Sections 341, 323, 337 and 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code and summons were issued against opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 and case was transferred to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd class for trial. The accusation of offence was explained to opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 on 24.3.2000 and trial commenced and evidence of prosecution was closed on 7.6.2002 and on 10.6.2002 statements of opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 were recorded under Section 313, Cr PC. Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition under Section 311, Cr PC to recall PW 2 for his cross-examination but his prayer was rejected by the learned Magistrate and then the petitioner preferred Cr. Revision No. 28/03 against this order which was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge observing that the prosecution should produce PW 2 within three days failing which the Court below will pass order in accordance with law. PW 2 was produced before the Court below and was examined and was discharged but on the same day the prosecution filed a petition with attendance of two witnesses and made prayer for examination of those two witnesses which was objected to by the opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 but the learned Magistrate allowed the prayer of the petitioner. Opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 preferred Cr. Revision No. 459/2003 against this order which was allowed and order dated 22.8.2003 of the learned Magistrate allowing the prayer of petitioner for examining two witnesses was set aside. Against this order the petitioner who is informant of Dharhara PS Case No. 7/99 has come up before this Court.