Balram vs State of M. P. - 2021 Supreme(MP) 609

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(MP) 609

ANAND PATHAK
Balram – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Rishikesh Bohare for applicant; B.M. Shrivastava, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

ORDER

1. The present petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 15.11.2021 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Mungwali, District Ashoknagar, whereby application under section 243 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

2. Precisely stated facts of the cases are that the petitioner is facing charge under sections 302, 307, 201, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and section 25/27 of the Arms Act before the trial Court. Evidence of prosecution has been concluded and thereafter, at the stage of defence evidence, the petitioner filed an application under section 243 of Cr.P.C. for issuance of process for ensuring the attendance of the defence witness i.e. handwriting expert, who prepared the report in connection with the memo (Ex.P/29) and seizure memo (Ex.P/30) allegedly signed by the petitioner, but handwriting expert gave opinion otherwise. According to him, those documents have not been signed by one and the same person who signed comparative signature and on documents marked as A-1 to A-20. The petitioner wants to call the said handwriting expert in support of his defence. The trial Court dismissed the said application, therefo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document