ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed questioning the conduct of the presiding Judge. Before pronouncing the judgment, on appreciation of the evidence, the learned trial Judge/Special Judge, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Court, Sivagangai, had altered the charges framed against the petitioner herein in C.C.No.20 of 2014.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the charges had been altered, the accused should be extended the benefit of recalling the witnesses so as to cross-examine the witnesses regarding the newly added or altered charges. Therefore, the learned counsel for the accused seeks stay of the proceedings and to set aside the order, dated 19.03.2021 passed by the learned trial Judge, altering the charges in C.C.No.20 of 2014, by way of filing the present Criminal Original Petition.

3. Already charges were framed as against A1 to A3 as under Section

120 (B) r/w. 467, 468, 471, 420, 409, 406 of IPC and r/w. Sections 13 (2) r/w. Sections 13 (1) (c ) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. As against A1 and A2 under Section 467, 468, 471 r/w. 467 and 468 of IPC and 420 of IPC and as against A3 as under Section 420 r/w. 109 of IPC. As against A1 under Section 406 of IPC and 13 (2) r/w. 13 (1) of Prevention of Corruption Act and as against A2 under Section 409 of IPC and under Section 13 (2) r/w. 13 (1) of Prevention of Corruption Act. As against A2 under Section 409 of IPC and under Section 13 (2) r/w. 13 (1) (c) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and as against A3 as under Section 109 of IPC r/w. 409 of IPC and 406 of IPC and r/w. 13 (2) r/w. 13 (1) ( c) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. As against A1 to A3 under Section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

4. The learned trial Judge, by his order dated 19.03.2021, had altered the charges against A1 under Sections 120 (B) r/w. 420, 468, 471, 420, 409 of IPC and under Section 13 (2) r/w. Section 13 (1) (c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. As Against A2 under Sections 120 (B) r/w. 420, 468 r/w. 120(B), 471 r/w. 120 (B), 420, 409 r/w. 120 (B) and Sections

13 (2) r/w. Sections 13 (1) ( c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. As Against A-3 as under Sections 120 (B) r/w. 420, 468 r/w. 120 (B), 471 r/w. 120 (B), 420 r/w.120 (B), 409 r/w. Section 120 (B) and Section 13 (2) r/w. 13 (1) ( c) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order on the ground that he has not offered an opportunity of hearing. The proceedings under 313 (1) of Cr.P.C., had already been completed.

5.The learned trial Judge/Special Judge, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Court, Sivagangai, has the power to alter the charges before pronouncing the judgment. At the same time, the learned Judge, while exercising his / her discretion to alter the charges based on the materials available before him / her. The resultant action of the learned Judge shall not prejudice the accused.

6.On perusal of the order passed by the learned trial Judge, dated

19.03.2021, it is found from the materials that the learned trial Judge arrived at the conclusion that A1 and A3 are the Government servants. They shall be charged for the offences punishable under Section 13 (2) r/w Sections (1)

and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

7.If the learned trial Judge intends to alter the charges, then chances must be provided to the accused for recalling and re-examining each of the witnesses, as per law. For recalling the witnesses, the accused shall not seek adjournments repeatedly. The accused is duty bound to the Court for early disposal of the cases.

8.In view of the above, the learned trial Judge/Special Judge, Vigilance and Änti Corruption Court, Sivagangai, is directed to proceed with the trial as if newly added charges have to be proved and the witnesses have to be recalled regarding the altered charges and to be cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused regarding the altered charges. The point for consideration is answ