DILIP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The appellant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 26.04.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Ramgarh in S.T. Case No.279 of 2014 whereby and whereunder, his petition under Section 340 Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the learned court below.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is not a party to the Sessions Trial No.279 of 2014. Sessions Trial No.279 of 2014 arose out of complaint case No.19 of 2007. The appellant is neither the complainant of the said complaint case nor has been cited as a witness in that complaint. The name of the appellant does not appear in the complaint of complaint case no.19 of 2007. A petition under Section 231 Cr.P.C. was filed in Session Trial No.279 of 2014 on behalf of the prosecution with a prayer for issue of summon to Dr. A.N. Minj, Sr. M.O. of C.W.S. Hospital, N.T.S. Barkakana for his evidence and production of original injury reports as to the injury sustained by Satyadeo Ram Dangi and his mother namely, Bindi Devi in that case. The respondent no.2 who is an accused in Sessions Trial No.279 of 2014 filed a counter to the said petition filed under Section 231 Cr.P.C. on behalf of prosecution on 18.03.2015. The grievance of the appellant herein is that in the said counter the respondent no.2 of this appeal has made false averments. The averments made in the counter and how they are false as asserted by the appellant herein , in the learned court below is as under:-