PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI,J. - (1.) The application under Section 254 was filed by the petitioner in which learned Court below denied the chance for calling the witnesses even when those witnesses were important.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has shown the impugned order in which the request of the petitioner to get Balvendra Singh, Ladhu Ram, Rugharam, Palisingh, Bindra Singh examined as witnesses have been recorded but since there was not proper addresses of the petitioner, therefore, witnesses have been not permitted by the learned Court below. As per counsel for the petitioner, the reasons given by the learned Court below is not sufficient to comply with the provisions under Section 254 of Cr.P.C. for calling the witness and it was statutory right of the petitioner to call those witnesses and in case there was discrepancy in their addresses then also the learned Court was wrong in not exercising the powers under Section 254 of Cr.P.C.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that if the learned Court below was of the view that there was a reason why these witnesses were not required in the present case then such reason could have been recorded whereas the learned court below has not recorded any detail reason as to how the witnesses have been refused to be called for.;