Honble SINGH, J.–Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(2). By this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that the order dated 5th March, 1997 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bar in criminal original case No.135/96 be quash- ed and set aside it. It amounts to the abuse of the process of the Court.

(3). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in criminal case No. 130/96, State vs. Sugan Chand & Ors., the petitioner Deep Chand and Prem Chand were examined as prosecution witnesses. Both of them were cross-examined at great length and as such it cannot be said that the accused persons were denied the opportunity of cross-examination of the petitioners but on 13.9.95, an application was submitted on behalf of the accused persons (who are non-petitioners No. 2 to 7) to re-call the petitioner under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for further cross-examination and that application was allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate by the impugned order dated 5th March, 1997, without any coge- nt and satisfactory reasons and, therefore, the impugned

Click Here to Read the rest of this document