Rajagopal Konar vs Ram Sai

B.V. Pinto

This petition is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 10.06.2010 passed by 25th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in CC No. 27598/2007 in which an application u/s 311 r/w 91 of Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner, who is accused before the trial Court is dismissed by the learned Magistrate. The learned Session Judge in Criminal Revision Petition No.25041/2010 has also upheld the order of the learned Magistrate.

Heard Sri. Siddarth.B.Muchandi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The teamed counsel for the Respondent is absent. Respondent/ Complainant has been served with copy of the notice of the Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, statement of objections of the respondent/complainant before the learned Magistrate is to the tenor of giving no objection to the said application subject to bearing cost of bringing witnesses by this petitioner himself.

I have perused the copy of the documents proposed to be produced before Magistrate which includes petition filed by the petitioner against respondent and also acknowledgement of the commissioner of the police, Tirunelveli. Under the circumstances and in view of the fact that the documents are already marked as Ex.D1 to Ex.D.4, there shall be no legal impediment in summening the said witnesses before the Court, except the time factor.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed with a direction to the learned Magistrate to issue summons to the witnesses mentioned in the application and subject to the co-operation of the petitioner in securing the said witnesses. It is also directed that the entire process of examination of the witnesses mentioned by the petitioner shall be completed within a period of three months, end if for any reasons, petitioner is unable to secure the witnesses, learned Magistrate need not extend the time granted herein.

In view of the final disposal of the main petition, Misc Crl.744/11 does not survive for consideration and disposed of accordingly.