1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for hearing.

2. The petitioner herein who is an accused in C.C. No.107 of 2005, has challenged-(i) the order dated 14.8.2015 allowing the application at Exhibit 142 filed by the prosecution for recall of the Investigating Officer for further examination and (ii) the order dated 14.8.2015 allowing Exhibit 143, filed by the prosecution, and thereby directing the Investigating Officer to record the statement of Dyaneshwar Khutwad, and further permitting the prosecution to examine the said witness.

3. Mr. Prakash Naik, the learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prosecution has sought to examine the Investigating Officer for adducing evidence in respect of the photographs produced by PW9 even though such photographs have not been referred to by any witness other than PW9. Learned Sr.Counsel Shri Naik submits that this is nothing but an attempt to fill up the lacuna.

4. Learned Sr. Counsel Shri Naik has further submitted that in the course of the evidence, PW9 had for the first time deposed that one Dnyaneshwar Khutwad was present at the time of the incident. Based on the