Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhagwan Das vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 April, 2022
Author: Atul Sreedharan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN
ON THE 11th OF APRIL, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 15053 of 2022
Between:-
1. BHAGWAN DAS S/O LATE SHRI GOPAL DAS ASERI
, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: THE THEN
BRANCH MANAGER HOUSE OF MAKHAN
MALVIYA NEHRU COLONY SEHORE DIST. SEHORE
MP (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. MOHAMMAD ISRAR S/O SSHRI MOHD. IBRAHIM ,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: THE THEN
DATA OPERATOR R/O C/O HOUSE BABLU BHAI,
DIWAN BAGH, SEHORE, DISTRICT- SEHORE, M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI VIJAY SHUKLA, LEARNED COUNSEL)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
P.S. ASHTA DIST. SEHORE MP (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI MANISH KHOLIA, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are aggrieved by
the order dated 14.02.2022 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge,
Ashta, District Sehore in Sessions Trial No.7/2017 by which an application dated
30.12.2021 moved by the petitioners for resummoning the notary Shri Daswani as
a witness was rejected.
The petitioners are the co-accused persons in a trial where they have been
charged of offences as herein above. On 29.12.2021, the petitioners were to
examine as a defence witness, Mr.Daswani, who was the notary. An objection was
taken that the petitioners have filed the said application only for the purpose of
Signature Not Verified
SAN
delaying the trial. The learned trial Court has held that on 29.12.2021, the learned
Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR
Date: 2022.04.12 12:11:34 IST counsel for the petitioners before the learned trial Court expressed that the defence
witness Sompal was not well and hence, he could not appear before the Court on
29.12.2021 and also said that the defence wants to release him and close the
evidence. Thereafter, on the very next day i.e. on 30.12.2021, the defence filed an
application for calling the same witness as a defence witness. The learned trial
Court had dismissed the said application only on the ground that it was at the
behest of the petitioners through their counsel that the said witness was given up a
day before and that the second application for calling him as a witness was
unsustainable.
The learned Court below failed to appreciate that in the course of a trial on a
particular date there may be an error of judgment on the part of the counsel, who
may inadvertently release a witness without examining him/her for whom he may
file an application on the very next date for recall, as has happened in this case.
Looking into the fact that the application for recall of the witness has been
made most promptly within 24 hours, and nothing specific has come on record or
in the observations of the learned trial Court as to why the petitioners would
deliberately try to delay the proceedings of the learned trial Court.
Under the circumstances, as the release of the witness a day before appears
to have been an act of inadvertence on the part of the counsel which he has sought
to rectify almost immediately for filing an application on very next day, it does not
appear to this Court that the same has not been done deliberately with the intention
of delaying the trial.
Under the circumstances, this application is allowed. The impugned order
dated 14.02.2022 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Ashta,
District Sehore is set-aside.
Learned trial Court is requested to allow and give an opportunity to the
petitioners to recall and examine their witness.
With the above, this petition is disposed of finally.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
JUDGE
pnm
Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR
Date: 2022.04.12 12:11:34 IST
