ASADULLAH PATWARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application directed against the order of the Sessions Judge allowing the prosecution to produce some more witnesses besides those mentioned in the previous list. The learned Counsel for the accused petitioner has argued that the Sessions Judge ought not to have summoned witnesses other than those mentioned in the prosecution list. It is argued that Section 252 (2), Criminal P. C, has no application to the present case and it was not open to the Sessions Judge to summon witnesses whose names were not included in the list of witnesses originally filed by the prosecution.

(2.) IT may be mentioned here that the accused is undergoing trial Under Section 161 of the Ran-bir Penal Code and Sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act No. XIII of 2006. Under Section 6 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act the Government has power to appoint special Judges and under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judges alone are qualified for appointment as special Judges. The Sessions Judge Kashmir has been appointed as a Special Judge for trying offences mentioned in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Act. Offences Under Section 161, R. P. C, and Sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act are triable by the special judge and therefore the accused is being tried for those offences by the Sessions Judge Kashmir.

(3.) THE procedure for the trial of these offences is laid down Under Section 8 of the Act which provides that a special judge may take congnisance of offences without the accused being committed to him for trial and in trying the accused persons shall follow the procedure prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure for the trial of warrant cases by Magistrates.