Shri Ram vs State of U.P.

C.A. Rahim, J.—This revision has been directed against the order dated 17.6.1997 passed by the District and Sessions Judge. Kanpur Dehat rejecting the application of the revisionist for summoning the witnesses named in the charge-sheet u/s 311, Code of Criminal Procedure in Sessions Trial No. 261 of 1995.

learned Counsel submits that the learned trial court illegally rejected the prayer of accused-revisionist and did not summon the witnesses mentioned in the petition. After perusal of Section 311. Code of Criminal Procedure, I find that the trial court may at any stage of the trial summon a person as a witness. The power given to the learned trial court appears to be discretionary and neither party can compel the court to exercise power u/s 311, Code of Criminal Procedure Moreover, it appears that after examination of the accused u/s 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-revisionist did not exercise his power to examine these witnesses is as defence witness and instead, he moved an application for examination of the witness as court witness. Also perused the order passed by the learned trial court and I do not find any illegality or impropriety in the order. Accordingly, this revision does not stand to any merit and the same is dismissed.