1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.879 OF 2009 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders 1. Heard Shri K.V.Pawar, Advocate for the Petitioner and Shri B.V.Wagh, APP for Respondents 2. Petitioner is the original complainant in Sessions Case No.217 of 2008 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Ahmednagar. She has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judge 5.8.2009 on Exhibit 14 before him, the copy of which is annexed as Exhibit F with this writ petition. The learned Judge has rejected the said application . 2 3. By application at Exh.14 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the writ petitioner herein made a grievance that the Investigating Officer Dy.S.P. Shri Somnath Ghage has deliberately kept some infirmities while sending charge-sheet to the court. According to petitioner, witness Gulab Baburao Randive is tampered with by the accused persons and he turned hostile due to influence of the accused and that fact was brought to the notice of the Court. However, the court did not pay any attention to the said fact. It is prayed in the application that the name of said Gulab Baburao Randive may be deleted from the list of witnesses and notice be issued to Dy. Superintendent of Police Shri Somnath Ghage. 4. It is also the case of the petitioner that there were three eye witnesses namely, Baburao Keru Jadhav, 3 Machindra Haribhau Taksal and Manoj Gorakshanath Khemnar and in in spite of prayer that their names should be included in the charge-sheet as witnesses, the Sessions Court declined to include their names in the charge- sheet. Copies of affidavits of said three witnesses are annexed as Exhibit G collectively with this writ petition. 5. Prayer is made before this court that the Sessions Court may be directed to add names of above said three persons namely, Baburao Keru Jadhav, Machindra Haribhau Taksal and Manoj Gorakshanath Khemnar as witnesses as they were eye witnesses. 6. Learned APP Shri B.V.Wagh for Respondents submitted that the committal order was passed on 29.9.2008 and application Exhibit 14 was given on 5.8.2009. The Sessions Court has observed that there is no provision of law under which prayer can be considered. 4 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri K.V.Pawar states that though there is no provision for amendment in the charge sheet subsequent to committal for deletion or addition, under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the court could examine the three witnesses named by the complainant. It is however admitted that application Exh.14 filed before the sessions court, is not for exercising powers under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. by the Court and for examining the above said three persons. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances, there appears no merits in the writ petition. Application Exhibit 14 was rightly rejected. 9. However, the petitioner shall be entitled to make fresh application to the Sessions Court through Public Prosecutor or otherwise requesting the Court under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. to consider to examine above said three 5 persons as witnesses. Sessions Court shall decide such application on its own merits. 10. With liberty as above, petition is disposed of. Date:12/11/2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/criwp879.09