PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the learned counsel. The witnesses who were summonned by the court have been named in the list in calendar of list of witnesses. The A.P.P. should have examined these witnesses before. Even when the application u/s 311 Cr. P.C. Was granted, then it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to produce these witnesses in Court. Summons were issued for these witnesses to help the prosecution to bring the witnesses but if the prosecution or the police Machinery did not serve the witnesses, then it was negligence of the prosecution itself. In State cases, it is the duty of the Investigating Officer to produce the witnesses in the court and they can have the summons of these witnesses from the court for their assistance. So it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to get the service effected on the witnesses and produce them. For the negligence of Investigating Officer, complainant should not suffer. NOT doubt the, case is at the stage of Final Arguments, but the witnesses are Independent and material witnesses. In the interest of justice. One opportunity is given to the State to produce the witnesses Mani Ram and Dalip in the court and examine them. For their assistance, they may take summons for these witnesses. The Complainary should also help the Investigating Officer to produce these witnesses. Fifteen (15) days time be granted to Investigating Officer to produce the witnesses. No further opportunity be granted and the case be disposed of within one month after recording the statements of these witnesses.

(2.) WITH this observation, the petition is allowed and the order of learned Magistrate dated 11/4/ 1989 is set aside. Petition allowed