- (1.) THE petitioner has filed the present revision application for setting aside the order dated 7.
(2.) 2009 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI Cum A.D.J. 13th at Dhanbad in R.C.Case No.7 (A)/87 (D) by which the learned court below allowed the petitioner filed by the prosecution under section 311 of the Cr.P.C. 2 The prosecution case in nutshell is that Mr. A.K. Asthana, Inspector of CBI lodged an F.I.R. against the eight persons stating therein that the accused Nos.1 and 2 entered into an unholy alliances with others and certified false record in number of Measurement books regarding the job of annual maintenance of repair, painting the doors and windows in "D" Block quarter of Bhuli Township during period of 1983 -1985 and thus enable the accused contractors cause great financial loss to the B.C.C.L. It is further reported that the work of painting of doors and windows was awarded to M/S Ajit Enterprises, Surendra Kumar and K.S.Singh for Rs.91,532.08 each, but the painting of doors and windows was not done as per specification. The false entries in the relevant book are enabling the contractors to receive payment for the work. It is further alleged that K.D.Singh did not execute the work himself but awarded the work to Umesh Singh another contractor in Benami. Similarly work pertaining to maintenance of annual repairs of "D" Block quarters awarded to M/S R.P.Tiwary, B.D. Singh and Gurucharan Singh, are reported to have been certified by the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the relevant Measurement Books without actual execution and the payments have been made to the tune of Rs.3,33,178.09 on the basis of the certificate given by the accused no.1 and 2. It is further stated that the veracity of the above allegation were verified during enquiry of PE.3/86(D) of this Branch. On the basis of the F.I.R. a case has been registered under section 120B read with 420/477A/460/471 I.P.C. and under section 5(2) read with 5(1) (d) of the P.C.Act 1947 i.e. R.C.Case No. 7(A)/87(D). The prosecution has filed a petition under section 311 I.P.C. praying therein for re -examining P. W.1,P.W.4,P.W.6,P.W.7and P.W.8 and further wants to examine the witness Sri N.K.Jha and S.N. Bhattacharya as they could not examine them during the trial. It is further stated in the said petition that the document numbers 3 to 31, 33,35, 37 to 43 which could not be exhibited and proved in advertently during trial though the said documents were filed along with the charge sheet. It is further stated that it is essential to exhibit and to prove the said documents for the just decision of the case.
(3.) AFTER hearing both the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the court below allowed the prayer of the prosecution to prove the aforesaid documents by re -examining and examining the witnesses and refused the prayer for examination of witness N.K.Jha and accordingly allowed the petition dated 12.12.2008 filed by the prosecution to the aforesaid extent.;