1 Cri.Revn.Appln.No.233/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.233 OF 2011 Dayanand s/o Vitthalrao Shewale and others ... PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri V.D. Salunke, Advocate for the petitioners Mrs. R.K. Ladda, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 11th November, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused criminal revision application and the annexures thereto. 2. Discretion exercised by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-1, Latur under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for granting permission to examine a witness is sought to be challenged in the present application. 3. The prosecution, in an effort to prove the charges under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian 2 Cri.Revn.Appln.No.233/2011 Penal Code, 1860, moved an application seeking permission to examine the Assistant Engineer, Murud for evincing a fact that there was no load-shedding at the material time giving rise to the occasion to light a kerosene lamp, which according to the defence, was responsible for causing accidental death of the deceased Sandhya. The defence objected to the application with the say dated 5.3.2009. The defence pleaded that the prosecution cannot be allowed to examine such witness when his statement was not recorded nor any document was collected from him during investigation, and his examination prejudiced the defence. 4. Learned trial Court, after hearing the parties, granted the application. Learned trial Court took into consideration the certificate issued by the Assistant Engineer showing the supply of electricity at village Chincholi (Bk.), the place of offence at the material time, and observed that the evidence of the Assistant Engineer was necessary for just decision of the case despite there being no statement recorded in the course of the investigation. 5. Examination of the Assistant Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. would shed light on the facts ruling at the material time at the place of the incident and would certainly enable the trial Court to appreciate the evidence 3 Cri.Revn.Appln.No.233/2011 with clear vision. Probative value of the evidence of such witness can be assessed in light of the submission that there was no statement of the witness recorded in the course of the investigation. 6. No illegality or perversity is perceived in the impugned order. Criminal Revision Application, therefore, stands rejected. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) fmp/crra233.11