This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of the High Court passed in revisional jurisdiction whereby the order dated 5th February, 2000 passed by the trial Magistrate dismissing the application of the State filed under Section 319 Cr.
2004 Supp 3 SCR 894 The following Order of the Court was delivered Leave granted.
The trial companyrt also numbericed the factum of the quashing of the proceedings against the appellant in the year 1995.
P.C. The State filed an application under Section 319 Cr.
P.C. by the trial Magistrate.
Twelve accused are facing trial.
The appellant was also arrayed as one of the accused but the High Court had quashed the case against him in the year 1995 on a petition filed by him under Section 482 Cr.
The case before the Magistrate relates to an incident of the year 1993 which led to certain simple injuries and damage to some crops.
By the impugned judgment the appellant has been arrayed as an accused to be tried with twelve other accused.
The High Court, in the impugned judgment has companye to the companyclusion that some of the prosecution witnesses have deposed about the presence of the appellant on the date of the incident and also about the instigation made by him to the other accused persons to destroy the crops and tree grown by PW 1.
The Magistrate first on examination of evidence, came to the companyclusion that the possibilities of the appellant being companyvicted were remote and, thereafter, made a passing reference to the factum of the proceedings having been quashed in the year 1995.
P.C. has been set aside.
P.C. before the Magistrate for summoning the appellant as an accused after the companyclusion of prosecution evidence examining 17 prosecution witnesses and recording of the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.
The learned Magistrate by a detailed order, after examination of the evidence, dismissed the application, inter alia, of numbericing that on evidence, the possibilities of the appellant being companyvicted were remote.
