- (1.) HEARD Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri R. D. Singh, learned AGA for the State.
(2.) THE applicants, through the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the order dated 1.3.2014 (Annexure No.1 to the accompanying affidavit) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court NO.4, District -Ballia in Session Trial No.155 of 2000 (State Vs. Parmatma and others), under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station -Haldi, District Ballia and further permit the applicant to further cross -examine P.W. -1, P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.5. Further to ensure the compliance of the earlier order dated 1.9.2008 passed by the Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, District -Ballia in Sessions Trial No. 155 of 2000 (State Vs. Parmatma and others), under Section 302 IPC, Police Station -Haldi, District -Ballia.
(3.) ADMITTED position as emerges out from the present application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is that the applicants are facing trial in S.T. No.155 of 2000 (State Vs. Parmatma and others), under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station -Haldi, District Ballia, Court No.4. On 1.9.2008 the case was fixed for the delivery of judgment. The trial Court, while preparing the judgment, found certain facts, for which cross examination of the witnesses was necessary by the Court, hence the pronouncement of the judgment was deferred. On certain issues the evidence which was produced by the defence was not clear hence the trial Court summoned P.W. -1 Panchanand Yadav, P.W. -2 Sunil Kumar Yadav, P.W. -3 Dhanpat Yadav, P.W. -4 Satya Narain, P.W. -5 Gama, P.W. -6 Dr. Gayasuddin Khan, P.w. -8 Chhavinath Singh and P.W. -9 Sub -Inspector Ramraj Yadav, the Investigating Officer and C. -W -1 Kanhaiya Lal for their appearance on 12.9.2008. On 25.9.2008 P.W. -1, P.W. -2, P.W. -3 and P.W. -5 further evidence was recorded by the predecessor trial Court, but the applicants were not given any opportunity for cross -examining the said witnesses.? Thereafter, the C.W. -1 Kanhaiya Lal's evidence was recorded on 4.11.2008 and 5.11.2008, but neither prosecution nor defence were given any opportunity for cross examination of the said witness by the Court.? Thereafter, case was kept pending for the evidence of P.W.8 Constable Chhavinath Yadav, P.W. -9 Sub -Inspector Ramraj Yadav and Investigating Officer, P.W. -6 Dr. Gayasuddin Khan, the said witnesses were summoned, but they did not appeared till 3.5.2012 and on 3.5.2012 the S.T. No.301 of 2000 State Vs. Dhanpati, which was the cross case of the present Session Trial was fixed for arguments by the trial Court on 11.5.2012, hence the trial Court has also fixed the present Session Trial also for arguments. It has been argued by the learned counsel for applicant that the trial Court when summoned the prosecution witnesses and other Court witness vide order dated 1.9.2008 under Section 311Cr.P.C./165 of Evidence Act and had also re -examined P.W. -1, P.W -2, P.W. -3, P.W. -5 and C.W. -1 Kanhaiya Lal then it should not have given opportunity to the applicants for their cross examination and should not have fixed the case for arguments simply because the cross case had been fixed for arguments by the trial Court. He further submitted that after the witnesses were recalled and re -examined by the trial Court vide order 1.9.2008 then the applicants had a right of cross examination of the said witnesses failing which prejudice would be caused to the them. He further submits that the trial Court has yet not examined other prosecution witnesses, such as P.W. -8 Chhavi Nath Yadav, P.W. -9 S.I. Ram Raj Yadav, P.W. -6 Dr. Gayasuddin Khan and they should also be examined by the trial Court has been ordered by the Predecessor Court in compliance of the order dated 1.9.2008. He further submitted that the order dated 1.9.2008? has become final as the same has not been challenged before this Court. He further argued that since 16.5.2012 the case was again fixed for arguments/313 Cr.P.C. He submitted that applicant has moved an application on 31.10.2012 before the trial Court being paper No. 301(Kha) for permitting the applicants to cross examine P.W. -1, P.W. -2, P.W.3, P.W. -5 and further ensure the compliance of the order dated 1.9.2008 passed by the Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, district Ballia as the prejudiced is being caused to them, which has been rejected by the trial Court by impugned order dated 1.3.2014 and the same be set aside.;