Labhu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 17615 Raj

(1 of 3) [CRLMP-3162/2018]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3162/2018

Labhu Ram S/o Shri Vishana Ram, Aged About 36 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Sahuo Ka Talla, Netrad, Tehsil Chauhatan, District Barmer.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rekha Ram Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Trivedi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

24/11/2021

The matter comes up on an application for early hearing of

the misc. petition.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed and the matter is taken up today itself for hearing.

The present misc. petition has been filed against the order

dated 10.09.2018 passed by learned Special Court, NDPS Cases,

Barmer, whereby the learned Judge allowed the application

preferred under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the prosecution

for calling the witnesses Shri Sher Singh Meena, Judicial

Magistrate, Choutan and Shri Indra Singh Head Constable to

appear before the trial court for examination.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial of

the case is almost concluded and allowing the application of the

prosecution under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for calling Shri Sher Singh

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-3162/2018]

Meena, Judicial Magistrate and Shri Indra Singh Head Constable is

highly arbitrary and unreasonable. He submits that the

prosecution is trying to get the mileage of the situation as the

names of Sher Singh Meena and Indra Singh are not in the list of

witnesses. Not only this, the prosecution has already closed the

evidence on its own without calling Sher Singh Meena and Indra

Singh to appear in the witness box at the time of recording of the

prosecution evidence. The case is more than 10 years old and

therefore, the learned trial court was not right in allowing the

application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. preferred on behalf of the

prosecution.

To support the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner

relies upon the judgment of this Court in Ram Chandra & Ors.

Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2016(4) Cr.L.R. (Raj.)

1806.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone

through the order dated 10.09.2018.

A perusal of the order dated 10.09.2018 shows that the

learned trial court allowed the application preferred under Section

311 Cr.P.C. on the ground that calling of Shri Sher Singh Meena,

Judicial Magistrate, Choutan and Shri Indra Singh, Head Constable

as witness in the present case will go to the root of the matter as

Shri Indra Singh is presently the Incharge of Maalkhana and he is

the person who prepared the Inventory of the material recovered

in the present case. Calling of Sher Singh Meena and Indra Singh

becomes more significant in the present case as the Shri Kailash

Dan, Seizure Officer and Shri Hukma Ram, Maalkhana Incharge

passed away during the pendency of the trial proceedings.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-3162/2018]

It is, in these circumstances, to reach a just decision in the

matter, learned trial court allowed the application preferred under

Section 311 Cr.P.C. for calling Shri Sher Singh Meena, Judicial

Magistrate, Chouhtan and Shri Indra Singh, Head Constable for

examination. This Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by

the trial court as Shri Sher Singh Meena and Indra Singh can

throw the light on the recovery effected in the present case and

they can be termed as a material witness for reaching to the just

decision in the matter.

As far as the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for

the petitioner in the case of Ram Chandra (supra) is concerned,

the facts of that case are totally different and are having no

application in the present case as in the case of Ram Chandra, the

prosecution witnesses No.2 and 7 were recalled after their

examination and the case was at the stage of pronouncement of

judgment, whereas in the present case, the final arguments are

yet to take place and death of Kailash Dan and Hukma Ram during

the course of trial has taken place. Thus, calling of Shri Sher Singh

Meena and Indra Singh is relevant in the present case and

therefore, they have rightly been called for appearing as a witness

before the trial court.

In view of the discussions made above, the present misc.

petition being bereft of merit, is hereby dismissed.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

33-praveen/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)