NAIM Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (which is herein after referred to as "the Code") has been filed on behalf of the applicant Mohd Nairn for quashing the impugned order dated 3.9.2014 passed against the applicant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Meerut, whereby further opportunity to produce defence evidence has been shut down as well as to stay the entire proceedings initiated in Session Trial No. 1517 of 2008. Heard Sri Vivek Dhaka, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

(2.) It appears that certain witnesses, who were sought to be summoned in defence by the accused, were not appearing in the Court and when on date 3.9.2014, which was the date fixed for defence evidence, time was further sought on behalf of the accused, the application seeking adjournment was not allowed and the opportunity to produce defence was closed by the Court. The case was listed for arguments thereafter.

(3.) It appears that the Magistrate, who had recorded the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Code and the concerned Qazi, were required to be summoned in defence alongwith record on behalf of the accused. The applicant had earlier also approached this Court and the Court had passed order dated 20.2.2014 in Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 4446 of 2014 in that regard. It appears that in compliance of the High Court's order, the Court below had issued process to summon the two witnesses, which were required to be produced in defence. But the impugned order dated 3.9.2014 reveals that the opportunity to produce the defence has been closed by the Court. The order sheet filed alongwith the application does not reveal that all the methods to ensure the summoning of the witnesses have been exhausted by the Court.