KANWARDEEP RANDHAWA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard both the learned Counsels on application for vacating the stay order passed on 26.2.2019 as well as on the merits of the case.

(2.) This criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the accused-petitioner challenging the order whereby application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. by the complainants Counsel for seeking calling of two witnesses namely Dr. Beena Bhatnagar and Dr. Usha Sharma who were shown as prosecution witnesses No. 10 and 11 in the charge sheet, has been allowed.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that both the said witnesses had been dropped by the Public Prosecutor in 2008 from appearing as witnesses and thereafter the proceedings have advanced and after the entire prosecution witnesses have been examined, the case was posted for final arguments. As a matter of fact, twice the case was finally heard but on account of the transfer of the Presiding Officer, the case could not be finally decided. Learned Counsel submits that in order to harass the petitioner, the present application has been moved after a period of 13 years seeking calling of witnesses. Although, the other witnesses have already put in appearance and have stated that no case for negligence can be said to have been committed by the accused-petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Swapan Kumar Chatterjee Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2019 (2) WLC (SC) Cri. 415 to submit that summoning of witnesses at belated stage causes great prejudice to the accused and the power should be very sparingly exercised.