BHUPAI MAN DAMAI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-2007-3-335
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on March 09,2007

Bhupai Man Damai Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL,J - (1.) THE petitioners, who are facing trial in CBI Case No. RC-1(S)-1/2000/SIC-IV/ND dated 11.1.2000 under Section 120-B read with Sections 302, 307, 323, 326, 342, 363, 506 IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the Anti Hijacking Act, 1982 and under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, have filed this criminal revision, which is barred by limitation, for setting aside the order dated 30.10.2006 passed by the Designated Court, Patiala, whereby the application filed by the accused for summoning the defence witnesses, was partly accepted.
(2.) IN this case, after completion of the prosecution witnesses, the petitioners filed an application for summoning the following persons in their defence witnesses :- (i) Dr. Farooq Abdulah Former Chief Minister, Jammu and Kashmir (ii) Mr. Madan Lal Khurana, Former Chief Minister, Delhi. (iii) Superintendent, Tihar Jail, Delhi. (iv) Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Kashmir. (v) Consulate Pakistan Government, Embassy of Pakistan, New Delhi. (vi) Commissioner of Police, Delhi. (vii) Chief Aerodrome Authority, Kandhar Aerodrome, Afghanistan through, Embassy of Afghanistan, New Delhi. The trial court after coming to the conclusion has declined to summon the aforesaid defence witnesses, while observing as under :- "From the list of DWs, I find that the names of these witnesses are given only to delay the present case with an ulterior motive. Otherwise, there is no need to summon these witnesses. The pilot of the Aircraft and Investigator have already been cross-examined at length along with other witnesses examined by the prosecution. There is nothing in the application how these witnesses will prove the innocence of the accused or falsify the case of the prosecution. These witnesses have no concern with the defence version. Therefore, the witnesses cannot be summoned as the application regarding summoning of these witnesses is made for the purpose of delay and for defeating the ends of justice and vexatious in nature."
(3.) THE Designated Court after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, ordered to summon only the Superintendent/concerned official of Tihar Jail, Delhi and Superintendent/concerned official of Central Jail, Arther Road, Mumbai. Against the said order, the petitioners have filed this criminal revision.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.