DEVI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these revision petitions are directed against the order of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ratangarh, dated January 3, 1990, whereby the learned Magistrate closed the evidence of the prosecution. Counsel for the petitioner submits that one opportunity more should be given to the petitioner informant to produce two witnesses, namely, Inderchand and Shiv Bhagwan. He undertakes to produce these witnesses on the date as may be fixed for their presence. This prayer has not been seriously opposed by the counsel for the accused Shiv Ratan. It may be mentioned that another accused Narsingh Dashas already expired.

(2.) Having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, it would be in the interest of justice if one more opportunity is given to the prosecution to examine Inderchand and Shiv Bhagwan. Counsel for the informant Devi Prasad is also representing Inderchand and Shiv Bhagwan in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 513/89. He undertakes that these witnesses will themselves appear before the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Ratangarh, on the date as may be fixed by this Court.

(3.) Accordingly, the revision petitions are allowed. The order dated January 3, 1990, is set aside and it is directed that if these witnesses, namely, Inderchand and Shiv Bhagwan appear in the Court on April 16, 1990, the learned Magistrate shall record their evidence. If these witnesses do not appear on April 16, 1990, no further opportunity will be given to the prosecution to summon them. Revision petitions allowed.