- (1.) P. K. Jain, J. Heard Sri Krishanji Khare, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned AG. A and Sri Haridwar Singh counsel for the Union of India.
(2.) ORIGINALLY an application under Sec tion 482, Cr. P. C. was moved for quashing the charge-sheet dated 17-6-97 but later on the application was converted into Criminal Revision. It appears that one Jawahar Yadav was arrested alongwith 1/2 Kg. Heroin and 1 Kg. 200 gm. R. D. X. A letter was also recovered from his possession. Further it appears that during investigation the name of revisionists as co-accused in the case was disclosed. The Investigating Officer on completion of the investigation submitted charge-sheet against the revisionist. It is contended that after filing of the charge-sheet the trial Court issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the revisionists. They however moved an ap plication dated 30-6-97 praying for recall of the warrants and also stating that there was no evidence against them and, therefore, they may be discharged. The learned trial judge rejected the prayer for recalling the warrants on the ground that in view of the provisions contained under Section 205 (2) the trial Court can direct personal atten dance of the accused at any stage of the trial proceedings. The second prayer was also rejected on the ground that this question shall be considered at the time of the hear ing of the case. It is this order of the trial Court dated 8- 7-97 which is challenged in this revision.
(3.) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the revisionists is that there is absolutely no evidence against the revisionists on the basis of which charge could be framed against them and that the alleged statement of co-accused Jawahar Yadav coming at the time of his arrest ex onerating himself and involving the revisionists was not admissible in evidence. THE trial Court was insisting personal ap pearance of the revisionists without con sidering the aforesaid contentions of the revisionists. By order dated 1-8-97 time was granted to the A. G. A for filing counter-af fidavit. No counter-affidavit has yet been filed. However, the revision can be disposed of on merits at this stage. Once the accused moved to the Court that there is absolutely no evidence against them on the basis of which the accused can be prosecuted or charged with commission of the offence, the Court is re quired to dispose of such application on merit. Such prayer cannot be rejected on the ground that it could be seen at the time of hearing of the case. If the contention of the accused is found to be correct, direction to hear them only after they surrender before the Court amounts to unnecessary harass ment of the accused. The revisionists had already appeared through counsel and had specifically stated in their objections that there is absolutely no evidence against them on the basis of which charge can be framed. The Court should have disposed of this ob jection of the revisionists on merit.;