SITARAM AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The petitioners are being tried in Criminal Case No. 225/96, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Todaraisingh, for the offence under Sec. 448, IPC. The charge was framed on 25.5.94, and the petitioners pleaded not guilty. After, the framing of the charge, about five years have elapsed. But, the prosecution could not complete the evidence. The petitioners thereupon moved an application, for closing of the prosecution evidence, in view of the judgment of Honourable The Supreme Court, in case of Raj Deo Sharma Vs. State of Bihar (AIR 1998 SC 3281) . The learned trial court rejected the application, vide its order dated 22.1.99 and directed the prosecution to produce the evidence on its own. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this criminal miscellaneous petition under Sec. 482, Cr.PC., has been preferred.

(3.) It has been admitted at Bar, before me, by both the sides that the charges was framed on 25.5.94, for the offence under Sec. 448, IPC, against the accused-petitioners, who pleaded not guilty. Admittedly, more than two years have elapsed since then and the prosecution evidence could not be completed. It has been admitted before me at Bar by the learned Public Prosecutor that the inability for completing the prosecution evidence within the said period, is not attributable to the conduct of the accused-petitioners. In the impugned order itself, the learned trial court has stated the reason for non-Completion of the prosecution evidence. It has stated that the witnesses are not appearing in spite of repeated summoning and that is why the prosecution evidence could not be completed.