9. cr wp 2786-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2786 OF 2010 Sharad Bhaskar Rajnor .. Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. Vivek Salunkhe i/b Mr. P.B. Shah for the Petitioner Ms. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 5th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner-original accused is facing prosecution in Sessions Case No. 38 of 2005. It is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon. The said case is mainly under Section 302 of IPC. 3. During the course of the trial, the investigating officer i.e PW 6 PI Ghule came to be examined on 19th November 2009. Thereafter, an application (Exh 68) came to be preferred by the petitioner for recalling of the witness. By order dated 20th August 2010, the said application came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, hence, this petition. 1 9. cr wp 2786-10.doc 4. It is an admitted fact that after the cross-examination of PW6 PI Ghule who is the Investigating Officer was over, four witnesses came to be examined i.e PW 7 Dr. Turabali who conducted the postmortem, PW 8 Ravindra Nikam who is the photographer, PW 9 Eknath, a police constable who has taken Muddemal to C.A. and PW 10 Govind More who is the retired headmaster of the school where deceased Kamal was studying. As after the IO was examined, four witnesses on material aspects have been examined, it would be in the fitness of things that the application of the petitioner for recall of the Investigating Officer PW 6 PI Gule is allowed. Obviously, as the four witnesses have been examined after the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer was over, the petitioner may want to put certain questions to the IO in relation to the evidence of these four witnesses. In this view of the matter, order dated 20th August 2010 rejecting the application of the petitioner for recalling of the witness is set aside. The said application is allowed. 5. The petition is disposed of in above terms. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 2 9. cr wp 2786-10.doc 3