NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J. - (1.) IN this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18th July, 2000 passed in R.C. Case No. 13 of 1988(D) by Special Magistrate, C.B.I., Dhanbad, whereby learned Magistrate has closed the prosecution evidence, fixing date for recording the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of the accused persons.
(2.) IN the petition, it has been stated that the closure of the evidence is contrary to law and the prosecution will be deprived of the opportunity of bringing the culprit to books by the said impugned order. It has been stated that the court below has passed the said order completely ignoring the legal provisions and the judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court and as such, the said order is bad and unsustainable. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties, on the other hand, opposed the petition. It has been stated that the case, in question, arose out of an F.I.R. lodged in the year 1988. The charge sheet in that case was submitted in the year 1989 and the charges were framed long back in the year 1994. For about six years, the prosecutor was given opportunity of bringing the evidences, but out of 18 (eighteen) charge sheet witnesses only six were examined. Ultimately, by the impugned order, learned Court below has closed the evidence.
(3.) MR . Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the Court below has acted illegally on the basis of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rajdeo Sharma v. State of Bihar 1998CriLJ4596 which was, subsequently, held not to be a good law in the case of P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka 2002CriLJ2547.;