GANDHI RAM & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are facing trial for an offence punishable under Sec. 302 I.P.C. before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track No. 2, Hanumangarh. After completion of prosecution evidence, an opportunity was accorded to the petitioners to explain their conduct with regard to the adverse circumstances available in the prosecution evidence.

(2.) Subsequent thereto, an application was filed by the petitioners as per the provisions of sub-section (3) of Sec. 233 Crimial P.C. for calling defence witnesses. In the application, the petitioners cited eight persons to be called for in defence. Learned trial Court by order impugned 3.12.2010 partly accepted the a i.cation and ordered to summon first five persons to depose in defence. The application stood rejected for remaining three persons.

(3.) At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he is not pressing this application to the extent, it relates to call Dr. Neena Chouhan who conducted autopsy on the person of deceased. However, it is stated that so far as other two persons are concerned, they are quite relevant witnesses and they are required to be called for in defence. It is urged that Bhagla Ram Meena was Station House Officer at Police Station Nohar, at the relevant time and he entered 'Rojnamcha' report on 11.9.2008 for the incident to which the F.I.R. dated 12.9.2008 relates. Thus, he is a person quite relevant to explain the circumstance. With regard to Manager, BSNL, Nohar region, it is submitted that he is also required to explain the events by producing relevant documents relating to telephonic contact from telephone No. 9793039275 to 01502/210517 from 11.9.2008 to 12.9.2008. The call details of the period aforesaid, as per learned counsel for the petitioners is quite relevant to explain the circumstances and to substantiate the defence of the accused persons.