RAM KISHORE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is facing trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar for the offence under section 409 IPC. When some of the prosecution witnesses already examined and the statement of Shri B.L. Baweja, prosecution witness, was being recorded on 5-1-1972, a document containing the statement of the accused Ex. P. 26 was produced by the prosecution. As it was produced at a very late stage, on objection was taken on behalf of the petitioner for not taking it into evidence. That prayer was, however, rejected. A subsequent prayer was made by the petitioner that as Mr. B. D. Thapar PW 1 and Shri Raghuvir Singh PW 8 were already examined on behalf of the prosecution before the production of Ex. P. 26, these witnesses as well as Shri B. L. Baweja PW 9 be re-called for further examination. That prayer also was however rejected by the trial court by its order dated 20-11-1973.

(2.) Aggrieved by that order, this revision petition has been presented, Here, before me, it has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that as Shri B. D. Thapar PW 1 and PW 8 Raghuvir Singh were already examined before the production of Ex. P. 26, these witnesses would have been re-called for further cross-examination as the accused wanted to cross-examine them in regard to matters contained in Ex. P. 26. He has however not pressed for re-summoning Shri B. L. Baweja PW 9.

(3.) The learned trial court in its order has observed that in its opinion there is no provision in Code of Criminal Procedure entitling the accused to further cross-examine during session trial. His attention was drawn to the provisions of section 540 Cr. P. C., 1898 (which was then applicable) but the learned Judge observed that as these witnesses were already examined, their further examination does not seem to him essential either in the interest of justice for the just decision of the case.