- (1.) A. S. Tripathi, J. This revision is directed against the order dated 4-11-1993 passed by the Special Judge, Azamgarh, rejecting the application (Paper No. 141-B) for summoning the Ballistic Expert in Sessions Trial No. 32) of 1992, State v. Doodhnath and others.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A. O. A. for the State and perused the record. It appears that in the aforesaid Sessions Trial No. 325 of 1992 pending in the Court of Special Judge/addl. Sessions Judge, Azamgarh, an appli cation fpaper No. 141-B) was moved under Section 3ll, Cr. P. C. to summon the Ballistic Expert examination and cross-examination. Charge was framed under Section 302, I. P. C. The Ballistic Expert has already sumbitted his report dated 25-5-1993 in Court. In that report it has been mentioned that the bullets recovered from the body of the deceased could be fired from the country-made pistol. The nature of the bullets as argued by the learned Counsel for the revisionist was of a bullet which could be fired only by rifle. In these circumstances the accused wanted to cross-examine the Ballistic Export about the possibility of the bullet recovered was fired by country- made pistol. This application was considered by the trial Court and was rejected on the ground that evidence was already closed. After examining the facts and circumstances of the case, I think that the witnesses can be summoned for the ends of justice even after close of the evidence before the judgment is pronounced in the case.
(3.) IN the circumstances as let out in this revision it appears necessary that the Ballistic Expert be examined and cross-examined in Court to clarify the ambiguity as pointed out and as also comes out from the report of the expert. Therefore, the revision deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the revision is allowed and the trial Court is directed to summon the Ballistic Expert as a court witness and allow opportunity to the prosecution as well as the defence to examine and cross- examine the said expert before the court. After examination and cross-examination of the Ballistic Expert the trial may be concluded to law. No orders as to cost. Revision allowed. .;