RINU ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitions are arising out of common order impugned dated 28.4.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardagga in Sessions Trial No. 69 of 2006 by which the prayer made on behalf of the prosecution for recall of the order impugned dated 12.12.2007, by which the prosecution evidence was closed, was rejected. Notices were served upon the members of the Opposite Party in Cr. Revision No. 810 of 2008 except on the O.P. No. 2 Bijay Oraon, who was reported to be dead by the process server.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as the State consistently submitted that the charge was framed against the members of the Opposite Party under Sections 327/307 I.P.C. and thereafter summons were issued to the prosecution witnesses. The witness Kiran Bala was in attendance before the Court on 12.12.2007 but the A.P.P. Incharge of the prosecution as was busy otherwise in different court in Sessions Trial No. 128 of 2007 he could not appear when the case was called out for evidence. He was taken by surprise to know that the evidence on behalf of the prosecution was closed in his absence. After closure of the evidence of the prosecution witness, the learned A.P.P. filed a petition under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure permitting the prosecution witnesses to be produced and examined for the ends of justice but it was also dismissed on 28.4.2008 and in this manner the prosecution and the informant were highly prejudiced.

(3.) None appeared on call on behalf of the O.P. though the notices were served upon them except upon the O.P. No. 2 Bijay Oraon.