CRM No.M-30180 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-30180 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 14.12.2011 Amar Nath ... Petitioner versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present : Mr. S.K.Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl. AG, Punjab. **** Augustine George Masih, J. Prayer in this petition is for quashing the order dated 31.05.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur vide which the application filed by the petiitoner for summoning of prosecution witness namely Balvir Singh, Inspector, Police Line, Ferozepur for his cross-exmination has been dismissed and further the order dated 15.09.2010 (Annexure P-2) vide which the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the cross-examination of the prosecution witness is the valuable right of the accused, which has been deprived to the petitioner. He contends that earlier prosecution has examined Balvir Singh, Inspector, Police Line, Ferozepur but thereafter he had never come present for cross- CRM No.M-30180 of 2010 (O&M) -2- examination. He contends that as a matter of fact after the investigation, police has submitted a cancellation report but on a protest petition filed by the complainant – Gurdial Singh Fertilizer Inspector, the Court took cognizance and summoned the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner through application under Section 311 Cr.PC intends to summon the investigating officer so as to cross-examine him to solicit the truth, which right has been deprived by the Court below and the application be allowed by setting aside the impugned orders. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent submits that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner by non-production or non-appearance of the prosecution witness for cross-examination as the evidence of this witness cannot be looked into by the Court. He further states that the evidence of the prosecution was closed vide order dated 29.04.2010 and there is no question of calling Balvir Singh, Inspector, Police Line, Ferozepur for his cross-examination when this order has become final. He accordingly prays that the present petition deserves to be dismissed. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. It is apparent from the record and on the submission made by the counsel for the parties that FIR No.179 dated 08.11.2004 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act was registered at Police Station Ghal Khurd, District Ferozepur. Upon investigation, cancellation report was submitted by the police. On notice issued to the complainant – Gurdial Singh, Fertilizer Inspector, a protest petition was filed by him, which was accepted and the cognizance of the offence was taken by the Judicial Magistrate. During the trial, prosecution CRM No.M-30180 of 2010 (O&M) -3- examined Balvir Singh, Inspector Police Line, Ferozepur as PW-2 and his examination-in-chief was recorded but his cross-examination was deferred. Thereafter, he was never produced for cross-examination and ultimately the evidence of the prosecution was closed by order dated 29.04.2010. On such closure of the prosecution evidence by the Court, petitioner moved an application under Section 311 Cr.PC for summoning the witness namely Balvir Singh, Inspector for cross- examination as his examination-in-chief stood recorded. This application was dismissed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur vide order dated 31.05.2010 by observing that the evidence of the prosecution stand closed and if any witness is not produced by the prosecution for cross-examination, his examination-in-chief is not to be read into evidence. It was also observed that if such an application as has been moved by the petitioner is allowed it would amount to recall of its own order by the court, which is not permissible under Criminal Procedure Code and it would also amount to reopening the prosecution evidence. The revision preferred by the petitioner against the said order was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Ferozepur vide order dated 15.09.2010 reiterating the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur. The orders passed by both the Court below reflect correct position in law and no prejudice as such has been caused to the petitioner by passing these orders as these orders are not vitiated by any illegality. If the petitioner is so interested in the evidence of Balvir Singh, Inspector, Police Line, Ferozepur he has an option with him to CRM No.M-30180 of 2010 (O&M) -4- summon him as a defence witness. There being no prejudice caused to the petitioner and the impugned orders being in accordance with law, no interference is called for by this Court. This petition stands dismissed. December 14, 2011 (Augustine George Masih) sonia Judge