Page 1

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION  

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2084  OF 2013

(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.10045/2013)

MANOHAR PRAJAPAT                           Appellant(s)

                    :VERSUS:

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH                    Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

2. We  have  heard  learned  counsel  for  the  

appellant and the learned counsel for the State of  

Madhya Pradesh. The appellant is an accused in S.T.  

No.461 of 2010 pending on the file of Additional  

Sessions Judge, Indore. He is facing charges under  

Sections  294  &  307  read  with  Section  34  of  the  

Indian Penal Code. The appellant's case is that on  

the date of incident he was not in Indore. According  

to him, he was in Nimach District. He has pleaded  

alibi. In support of his plea the appellant wanted  

to  examine  nine  witnesses  from  Nimach.  He,  

therefore, moved an application for summoning those  

witnesses.  It  appears  from  the  order  dated

Page 2

2

11.10.2013 passed by the High Court that the High  

Court directed the Trial Court to issue notices to  

the concerned witnesses for their appearance before  

the Court within a period of one month from the date  

of  the  order  i.e.  11.10.2013.  The  case  of  the  

appellant is that from 12.10.2013 to 17.10.2013 the  

Courts were closed because of public holidays. The  

appellant obtained the certified copy of the order  

dated 11.10.2013 on 18.10.2013 and moved the Trial  

Court on 30.10.2013.  The Trial Court issued summons  

to  the  nine  witnesses  on  30.10.2013  for  their  

appearance before it on 11.11.2013. It appears that  

on 11.11.2013 out of nine witnesses, three witnesses  

appeared and they were examined by the Trial Court.  

For  summoning  the  remaining  six  witnesses  an  

application was made by the appellant on  12.11.2013  

before the learned Sessions Judge which was rejected  

on the same date on the ground that the High Court  

by its order 11.10.2013 had given the appellant one  

month's time.  However, the appellant had not taken  

the required steps within that period.  The Trial  

Court observed that in such circumstances, it is not  

necessary  to  grant  one  more  opportunity  to  the  

appellant to lead defence evidence. Being aggrieved

Page 3

3

by  the  said  order  the  appellant  filed  criminal  

revision in the High Court. The High Court by the  

impugned order refused to interfere with the order  

dated 12.11.2013 passed by the Trial Court. Hence  

this appeal by special leave.  

3. We  are  informed  that  the  Trial  Court  has  

almost completed  the examination  of the  witnesses  

and the matter is posted for judgment. It is true  

that there is some negligence on the part of the  

appellant.  If  the  appellant  had  obtained  the  

certified  copy  of  the  order  dated  11.10.2013  on  

18.10.2013, nothing  prevented him  from moving  the  

Trial Court at the earliest.  He chose to wait and  

moved an application on 30.10.2013. It is this delay  

on his part that persuaded the High Court to reject  

his application. We share the  anxiety of the High  

Court. However, we cannot lose sight of the fact  

that the appellant has pleaded the defence of alibi  

and wanted to examine some more witnesses in support  

thereof.  In the circumstances, in our opinion, in  

the interest of justice the appellant needs to be  

given  a  last  opportunity  to  examine  his  defence  

witnesses  which,  of  course,  will  be  subject  to

Page 4

4

payment of cost of Rs.5000/-. Hence, the impugned  

order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. The  

appellant shall move an application before the Trial  

Court within one week from today for summoning the  

rest of the witnesses. On such an application being  

filed by the appellant, the Trial Court shall issue  

summons to the said six witnesses and the same shall  

be  served  upon  them  immediately.  Examination  of  

these  six  witnesses  shall  be  completed  within  a  

period  of  one  month  from  the  date  of  service  of  

summons  on  the  witnesses.  This  entire  exercise,  

however, will be subject to the appellant depositing  

a  sum  of  Rs.5000/-  in  the  High  Court  of  Madhya  

Pradesh, Indore Bench which shall be credited to the  

account  of  State  Legal  Services  Authority.  The  

appeal is disposed of accordingly.   

.........................J (RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI)

.........................J (J. CHELAMESWAR)

New Delhi; December 11, 2013.