witnesses have been examined, the case was posted for final arguments. As a matter of fact, twice the case was finally heard but on account of the transfer of the Presiding Officer, the case could not be finally decided. Learned counsel submits that in order to harass the petitioner, the present application has been moved after a period of 13 years seeking calling of witnesses. Although, the other witnesses have already put in appearance and have stated that no case for negligence can be said to have been committed by the accused-petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Swapan Kumar Chatterjee Versus Central Bureau of Investigation, 2019 (2) WLC (SC) Cri. 415 to submit that summoning of witnesses at belated stage causes great prejudice to the accused and the power should be very sparingly exercised. 4. Per contra , learned counsel for the complainant submits that the delay in proceedings occurred on account of the petitioner having filed a writ petition before this court challenging the decision taken by the Medical Council of India relating to suspension of the petitioner’s license for 6 months. The said writ petition was pending from the year 2016 upto 2019 when it was dismissed in default. In the said writ petition, there was a stay granted and continued. On account of the same the petitioner sought adjournment in the case pending before the competent trial court, therefore the application for calling of the two witnesses was delayed. It is submitted that both the doctors are material witnesses as they were present at the time of the operation and would be able to give the exact evidence with regard to the fact whether negligence was caused or not in the
