[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.4115 OF 2008 Veerumal Dularam Nainwani @ Sunder ..Applicant Vs. Intelligence Officer NCB, Mumbai and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.Ayaz Khan advocate for applicant Mr.J.R.Solanki counsel for Respondent No.1 Mr.A.S.Shitole A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : DECEMBER 2, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 2, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 2, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original accused and the learned counsel for NCB. 2. The applicant is facing prosecution in NDPS Special Case No.106 of 2004 which is pending before the Special Court under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (N.D.P.S. Act) at Mumbai. The said case is under N.D.P.S.Act. The applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2008 passed by the learned Special Judge [-2-] allowing the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. By the said order, permission was granted to examine one Nareshbhai Thakkar as a witness as he was Manager of Gujarat Hindu Lodge. 3. It is seen that in this case, all the witnesses had been examined. Thereafter, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and arguments commenced. After the arguments were heard for considerable period of time, an application came to be preferred by the prosecution under section 311 of Cr.P.C. for examination of Nareshbhai Thakkar as a prosecution witness. Firstly, from the facts of the present case, it is seen that application has been belatedly preferred by the prosecution. The prosecution had sufficient opportunity to examine Nareshbhai Thakkar as a witness. However, it was not done. 4. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant was apprehended on 8.3.2004 at 10.30 a.m. from Sufi Manzil at Pydhonie, Mumbai. The said premises are the residential premises of original accused no.2 and it is the prosecution case that the applicant was found in the said premises on [-3-] 8.3.2004 at about 10.30 a.m. However, the case of accused is that at the relevant time, he was not in Sufi Manzil which is at Masjid Bunder but he was picked up from Gujarat Hindu Lodge. The prosecution got exhibited the documents relating to Gujarat Hindu Lodge. The said documents are at Exhibits-79 to 81. It is pertinent to note that it is the prosecution who has got these documents exhibited. The documents came to be exhibited as the prosecution as well as the accused both admitted the genuineness of the documents which are at Exhibits 79 to 81. In view of these facts, in my opinion, it is not necessary to examine Nareshbhai Thakkar who was Manager of the Lodge at the relevant time. In the facts of the present case, it cannot be said that his evidence is essential for just decision of the case, hence, order dated 12.11.2008 in NDPS Spl.Case No.106 of 2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gr.Bombay, is set aside. 5. Application is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]