Petitioner challenged an interim order denying him a fair opportunity to produce defence evidence. The court found no ground to interfere, clarified conditions for summoning specific witnesses, and disposed of the matter.
Interim order dated 30.09.2009 not interfered with. Directions given for next date of hearing before trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.No.6089 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.6089 of 2009. Decided on: October 23, 2009.
Shri Krishan
.. Petitioner
VERSUS
Kailash Chander and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI
PRESENT Mr.Aman Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner.
M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
It appears that after the directions given by the High Court, the parties were to appear before the trial Court on 17.12.2008. Since defendant No.1, Mukhtiar Singh had died and counsel for defendant nos.2 & 3, did not have any instructions for appearance till 06.02.2009, and the defendant No.3-petitioner did not appear pursuance to the Court notice through Munadi even on 17.04.2009, the defendant No.3-petitioner, claims that he has not been given a fair opportunity to produce the defence evidence.
On asking of the Court, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to examine (i) Officer In charge
. . . 1
C.R.No.6089 of 2009
ASC, MT, Bangalore; (ii) Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Village Patuwas, Tehsil Charkhidadri, District Bhiwani; and (iii) District Election Officer, District Bhiwani.
Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to satisfy this Court regarding the relevancy of examination of Officer In charge ASC, MT, Bangalore. So far as Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Village Patuwas, Tehsil Charkhidadri, is concerned, it is apparent from the impugned order that Surender Kumar, Gram Sachiv, has been summoned by the Court for next date of hearing through Deputy Commissioner.
So far as third witness sought to be examined i.e., District Election Officer, District Bhiwani, is concerned, counsel for the petitioner submits that he is required to be produce to prove the record of the election i.e. Voters List etc. A certified copy of Voters List can always be tendered.
Taking into consideration, the totality of the circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere in the interim order dated 30.09.2009.
At this stage, counsel for the petitioner informs that the next date of hearing fixed before the trial Court for production of defendant's evidence is 11.11.2009. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the trial Court regarding the purpose and relevancy of the production of Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Village Patuwas, Tehsil Charkhidadri, District Bhiwani and District Election Officer, District Bhiwani, by moving an application prior to the next
. . . 2
C.R.No.6089 of 2009
date of hearing, the trial Court may scrutinize the relevancy and purpose of the said witnesses and if deemed appropriate, in the interest of justice, may issue dasti summons for appearance of the said two defendant witnesses. It is further made clear that subjective satisfaction of the Court, in this respect, will be final.
Disposed of.
(M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE
October 23, 2009. rka
. . . 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in an interim order denying the petitioner a fair opportunity to produce defence evidence.
Whether proposed witnesses are relevant and necessary for production of defendant's evidence.
Shri Krishan
Kailash Chander and others
M.M. Bedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
