Court No. - 28 Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 494 of 2010 Petitioner :- Painter & Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- A.K. Mishra Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Alok K. Singh,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. and perused
the record.
After examination of PW-3 an application was moved by the learned ADGC
saying that in the statement of PW-3 it has been said that his sister-in-law
(Bhabhi), Rajkunnisha and elder brother Islamuddin were also present on the
spot, though they have not been included in the list of witnesses by the
Investigating Officer. Therefore a request was made to summon them to
depose before the court below. This application was allowed by a single line
order to the effect that “Let witnesses be summoned for the date fixed.” This
order has been passed on the application itself. Learned counsel has also
brought on record entire statement of PW-3 on record wherein he has
admitted that on earlier occasions he did not mention about the presence of
these witnesses. Similarly he also admitted that when these witnesses were
not examined by the Investigating Officer then they did not bring it to the
notice of the authorities concerned or moved any application in that regard.
Learned counsel submits that these relevant facts should have been considered
before passing the order. It is also not ascertainable from reading of this one
liner (order) as to whether or not the defence was heard before passing this
slip shod order.
Therefore I find it to be a fit case for invoking inherent powers of this Court
to ensure substantial justice. The petition is therefore allowed and the
impugned order is quashed. The learned court below is directed to pass an
order afresh in this regard in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 3.2.2010
PAL/