- (1.) T. P. Garg, J. The revisionist/ petitioner has filed an affidavit along with which the application (Annexure "2") to recall Satyadeo and Satish. P. Ws. , for cross-examination has been filed. In para 5 of the affidavit it has been stated that at the time of recording the statements of the aforesaid P. Ws. the revisionist's counsel was not given opportunity to cross-examine these two wit nesses. It is further stated in para 6 that an application (Annexure "2") dated 17-3-1997 was filed requesting the court to allow cross-examination of these two witnesses, but the same was rejected vide the impugned order.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A for the State. Both agreed that this petition/ revision be disposed of finally at this stage. A perusal of the impugned order shows that both the aforesaid witnesses were fully cross-examined. It has, however, not been mentioned as to whether these two witnesses were cross-examined on behalf of Suraj Pal, revisionist on whose behalf the affidavit has been filed wherein it has been specifically stated that his counsel was not given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. Under these circumstances, and in the absence of any such mention in the im pugned order it appears that the revisionist's counsel was perhaps, not given opportunity to cross-examine these two wit nesses. The learned counsel says that he will not take more than one opportunity to cross-examine these two witnesses and he is also prepared to deposit the necessary ex penses of the witnesses in the trial court. In view of the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel as also having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby directed that the learned Trial Judge shall give one opportunity to cross-examine the two witnesses, viz. Satyadeo and Satish, P. Ws. 2 and 3 respectively to Suraj Pal, revisionist, or his learned counsel. Both these witnesses would be called at the expenses of the revisionist which he would deposit within 15 days from today in the Trial Court and only thereafter, process will be issued. It is made clear that in case the revisionist does not avail of the opportunity on any one date of hearing that may be fixed by the trial court, he may not be given any more opportunity for the purpose.
(3.) WITH the aforesaid observations this revision/petition is disposed of finally. Petition disposed of. .;