BIJAY CHOUDHARY @ CHJIOTU CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 1.6.2016 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bokaro in S.T. No. 151 of 2013 arising out of B.S. City P.S. Case No. 123 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 459 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the learned trial court had exercised suo motu powers under Sec. 311 of Crimial P.C. and had summoned two non-charge-sheeted witnesses for their examination.

(3.) It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that thrice the date was fixed for the pronouncement of the judgment, but the learned trial court while exercising its suo motu powers had summoned 2 witnesses for their examination. Learned counsel further submits that earlier also the prosecution evidence was closed after examination of the charge-sheeted witnesses and thereafter applications were filed by the prosecution under Sec. 311 of Crimial P.C. which were allowed, but subsequently at the time of pronouncement of judgment, the learned trial court had exercised its suo motu powers under Sec. 311 of Crimial P.C. Learned counsel submits that the examination of the witnesses as had been directed in the impugned order dated 1.6.2016 are not of much importance, but the learned trial court without any basis had passed the impugned order dated 1.6.2016.