1 S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.542/2007 Mohan Lal & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of Order :: 24-07-2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI Mr. Manish Dadhich, for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Purohit, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.) No.2, Bikaner dated 7.5.2007 whereby he rejected the application of accused- petitioner under Section 311 read with Section 293, sub-section (2) for calling handwriting expert Vinod Choudhary, Assistant Director, though on the relevant document, he has given opinion which is marked as Ex.P/40. Since the document was produced by the prosecution, therefore, it is for the prosecution to see as to which witness, he wants to produce. When the prosecution evidence has been closed and the statement of the accused has been recorded and the case is fixed for the defence evidence, the reasons assigned by the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejecting the application requires no interference. If the defence wants to 2 produce witness, he can do so. In the light of the above observation, the revision petition is dismissed. Record of the trial court be sent forthwith. [DEO NARAYAN THANVI],J. Praveen