JUDGMENT :

1. This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following prayer:-

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the order passed by the Additional Session Judge (Women Atrocities Court), Jodhpur in Session Case No. 127/2013 order dated 13.08.2018 may be set aside and the lower court may be directed that petitioner may be allowed to test himself for the Narco Analysis Test and subsequently report of that could be considered by the Hon’ble Court and in alternatively any appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court fit just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition has been preferred against the order dated 13.08.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan in Sessions Case No.127/2013, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the application of the petitioner, wherein he sought to submit himself to a Narco Analysis test and bring the resultant report of the same onto the record as a part of his defence. He further submits that the petitioner, who is husband of the deceased-victim, is facing trial under Sections 304-B & 498A IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that after the examination of the prosecution witnesses and defence witnesses, an application was preferred by the petitioner to get himself examined for Narco Analysis test, which is a recognized scientific technique, at the relevant stage of Section 233 Cr.P.C.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that Section 233 Cr.P.C. would operate, as while entering into his own defence, the petitioner is entitled to present any evidence, he may have in support thereof.

5. Section 233 Cr.P.C. reads as follows:

“233. Entering upon defence.

(1) Where the accused is not acquitted under section 232, he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in support thereof.

(2) If the accused puts in any written statement, the Judge shall file it with the record.

(3) If the accused applies for the issue of any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or thing, the Judge shall issue such process unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded, that such application should be refused on the ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice.”

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that once the stage of Section 232 Cr.P.C. is crossed and an acquittal is not made in favour of the petitioner, an indefeasible right of the petitioner emanates to to adduce any evidence in support of his defence, and that the learned Court below has erred in denying him the same, vide the impugned order.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court in State of Rajasthan Vs. Jasveersingh Jat reported in 2017(4) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 2079. Relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:

“6. I have heard and appreciated the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

7. The solitary objection raised by Shri Sunil Mehta learned counsel representing the complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor for opposing the prayer of the accused to get himself subjected to the invasive scientific test was that the application was belated and that if at all, the same could have been filed during the course of investigation as per the plain language of Section 54 Cr.P.C.. However, the said objection is not of any significance because in the entire purview of Cr.P.C., the only stage where the accused is allowed to speak out before the court is the stage of defence i.e. under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Before that, the accused has to simply go by the commands of the prose