MOHAMMAD AKBAR S/O. MOHAMMAD SAHEB Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 17 applicants are undergoing prosecution in the Court of the First Class Magistrate, Amraoti, under Sections 148, 188 and 837, Penal Code, in respect of disturbances which took place in Amraoti on the night of 8th September 1946 and is a the chalan 18 witnesses were cited against them. Only 4 of these were, however, examined prior to the framing of the charge; and on 20th November 1946 the District Police Prosecutor intimated that a prima facie case had been established and that he would examine the remaining prosecution witnesses if necessary after the framing of the charge. After the charge had been framed and 8 of the prosecution witnesses had been further cross-examined, the District Police Prosecutor stated that he did not want other prosecution witnesses to be examined.

(2.) ON 11-2-1947, when the examination of the defence witnesses had ended the case was closed for arguments 2 daya later. Arguments were duly heard but on 22-2-1947, the date fixed for the delivery of judgment, the Magistrate in pursuance of the defence complaint that the prosecution had deliberately withheld evidence issued process for the attendance of the nine witnesses given up by the prosecution as well as for that of the Additional District Magistrate, Deputy Superintendent of Police and City Inspector. The applicants went up in revision against this order but their application was summarily rejected by the Sessions Judge, East Berar, and they have now moved this Court to have the order set aside on the ground that it favoured the prosecution and was not in the interests of justice.

(3.) IN Gur Bakhsh Tewari v. Emperor A.I.R. 1918 Oudh. 142 it was held that it was not proper for the High Court to interfere in revision in a case in which the Magistrate after the evidence of the defence was closed examined certain witnesses for the prosecution and gave at the same time full liberty to the accused to cross-examine them.