SHAM LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. B.K. Kaw, learned Advocate for petitioners as well as Mrs. Shaista Hakim, Government Advocate for respondents.

(2.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu dated: 16 -07 -2001. By the aforesaid order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu allowed the application of the respondent -State and permitted the production of three witnesses in invoking provision of section 540 Code of Criminal Procedure, Svt. 1989 (1933 A.D.).

(3.) THE main grievance of the petitioner is that the trial court has misconstrued the provisions of section 540 Code of Criminal Procedure, Svt. 1989 (1933 A.D.) and its application not in right perspective in allowing production of the witnesses, whose names do not figure in the panel of witnesses, specified in the challan. It is further contended that respondent -State cannot be allowed to improve the prosecution case by the production of the witnesses, merely on the ground that it has been found in the evidence of Chatter Pal and Shiv Ram examined during the trial that the children of the accused Rash Pal and victim Soma Devi were also present at the time of occurrence. The respondent had filed this application for production of the witnesses after a period of five years and had their evidence been essential for just decision of the case being the eye witnesses of the occurrence; what prevented the respondent in not approaching the court with utmost promptitude, remains unexplained and enigmatic.