GOVIND YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) PETITIONERS have filed this writ application challenging the order dated 7.10.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.II, Tenughat, in S.T. No.216 of 2003, whereby the application filed by the prosecution under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for examining the witness namely, Bhubneshwar Gope was allowed and by the same order, the Court below has also directed for examination the Doctor of Neurosurgery, Department of RIMS, Ranchi, with respect to the treatment of the witness Bhubneshwar Gope in the hospital.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State on the other hand has opposed the prayer and has pointed out that from the impugned order it would appear that said Bhubneshwar Gope was injured person and accordingly, examination of Bhubneshwar Gope was necessary for the ends of justice. It has been pointed out that the impugned order would show that Bhubneshwar Gope was present for examination in the Court below on two dates, but his evidence could not be recorded due to absence of Presiding Officer. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that Bhubneshwar Gope being injured, is an important witness for the prosecution and his examination in the trial is necessary for the ends of justice and as such, there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the Court below.