JUDGMENT

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed challenging Annexure J order by which an application under Section

311 Cr.P.C to reopen the defence evidence is rejected. 2. Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.75/2016 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (Economic offences), Ernakulam. The case was posted for defence evidence on 02/08/2023 but it is submitted that the counsel for the accused could not be present in Court when the case was called. So defence evidence was closed. It was on account of some inadvertent mistake in the office of the counsel in noting the posting date that there was no representation, is the submission.

3. On 19/07/2023, it was ordered to repeat warrant to the defense witness and it was omitted to take steps from the office of the lawyer, is the further submission.

4. According to the petitioner, it was an omission from the part of the clerk attached to the office of the counsel. Examination of defence witness is essential for the fair disposal of the case, is the submission. But the learned Magistrate, after considering the matter in detail and also considering the fact that the evidence of defence witness will not improve the case