Early Times Report
Jammu, June 23: In a significant order in an 18-year-old criminal case, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu has granted one final opportunity to the prosecution to examine the Investigating Officer in a case arising out of FIR No. 142/2008 registered at Police Station Domana, Jammu.
The order was passed by Vacation Judge of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court at Jammu, Justice Sanjay Parihar, in a criminal revision petition filed by Leela Saini against Pritam Saini and others. The petitioner had challenged the order dated December 22, 2025, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, whereby the prosecution evidence was closed.
The case relates to offences allegedly punishable under Sections 307, 452, 354, 323 and 34 RPC. The petitioner, who is the complainant/informant in the FIR, pleaded before the High Court that the trial court’s order was non-speaking and that the closure of prosecution evidence without examining the remaining necessary witnesses could seriously prejudice the prosecution case.
Appearing for the petitioner through virtual mode, Advocate Zulker Nain Sheikh argued that the trial court ought to have considered the relevance and necessity of the remaining witnesses before closing the evidence merely on the ground of delay.
The High Court noted that the FIR was registered in 2008 and the challan was reportedly presented in 2010. It also observed that out of 14 witnesses cited by the prosecution, two had expired and the majority of material witnesses had already been examined.
While the Court found no patent illegality in the trial court’s order closing prosecution evidence, it accepted that PW-7, the Investigating Officer, was a material witness who had allegedly unearthed the crime and conducted the investigation.
Accordingly, the High Court modified the trial court’s order to a limited extent and directed that the prosecution be given one final opportunity to examine PW-7, the Investigating Officer, on a date to be fixed by the trial court.
The Court also directed the petitioner to render all necessary assistance in securing the presence of the witness and to ensure that no further delay is caused in the matter. With these observations, the petition was disposed of. (JNF) |
