Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010124312025 2025:GAU-AS:9725 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./217/2025 KAILASH SHARMA SON OF LATE PREMODAKANTA SARMA, RESIDENT OF LAMB ROAD, UZANBAZAR, LATASIL, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM PIN-781001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:PARESH KALITA SON OF LATE DIGAMBAR KALITA RESIDENT OF UZANBAZAR NEAR JORPUKHURI GUWAHATI KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM PIN-781001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K DAS, H BORAH,MR. M J GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. P BHOWMICK (R-2),MR. N R SHARMA (R- 2),MR. J DAS (R-2),MR. A SHARMA (R-2),MR. A TALUKDAR (R-2),MR. A KHOUND (R-2),MS. N CHOUDHURY (R-2),MR. A K BHUYAN (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 28.07.2025 Page No.# 2/4 Heard Mr. M.J. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1, State of Assam; and Ms. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2-complainant. 2. The respondent no. 2 as the complainant has instituted a complaint in the year 2015 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup [M] at Guwahati arraying the petitioner herein as the accused no. 2 in the complaint apart from three other persons as accused. The said complaint had been registered as C.R. Case no. 1822/2015. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup [M], Guwahati [‘the Trial Court’] took cognizance on the complaint for the offences under Sections 499/500/501/502/34, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and issued processes against the accused persons for their appearance. 3. In due course, the trial of the complaint case proceeded with examination of the witnesses from the complainant’s side. After closure of the evidence from the complainant’s side, the petitioner informed the Court that the defence would adduce evidence. Though the defence inclined to adduce evidence, the trial is at the stage of adducing defence evidence since 21.09.2022, as recorded in the Order dated 18.03.2025 of the learned Trial Court. 4. The petitioner, in this criminal revision petition, has assailed an Order dated 18.03.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court whereby a petition, Petition no. 2734/2024, preferred on behalf of the petitioner was rejected. In the said Petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, it was apprised that on that day, the petitioner suddenly fell sick for his high blood pressure and, therefore, he was not in a position to appear before the Court. Projecting so, the petitioner prayed for another date for his evidence as a defence witness [D.W.]. 5. In the impugned Order, the learned Trial court has observed that the trial of the complaint case is pending at the stage of defence evidence since 21.09.2022. The learned Trial Court has not found any good ground to grant any further adjournment to the petitioner- accused no. 1 for adducing defence evidence. Accordingly, the defence evidence was closed by the impugned Order dated 18.03.2025 by posting the case on 03.04.2025 for argument. Page No.# 3/4 6. Mr. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as on date, the parties have not advanced their argument. 7. Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that though the petitioner has been seeking adjournment time and again, another opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to adduce his evidence. When a query is made by the Court to the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 on the point whether the same is the only submission, Ms. Choudhury has categorically submitted that the respondent no. 2 is making such submission subject to deposit of a reasonable cost. 8. The complaint case is pending before the learned Trial Court since 2015. Though evidence from the complainant’s side was over much earlier, evidence of the defence side has not yet started. The other accused persons who are facing the trial in person, that is, the accused no. 3 and the accused no. 4 have not made any prayer for adducing defence evidence. It is only the petitioner standing in the trial as the accused no. 1, who has made the prayer for adducing defence evidence. 9. Having regard to the facts that the trial of the case is pending since 2015; the trial of the case is pending at the stage of defecne evidence since 21.09.2022; and the respondent no. 2-complainant has made a concession for allowing the petitioner-accused no. 1 to grant one last opportunity to adduce evidence, subject to payment of reasonable amount as cost; this Court is of the considered view that for securing ends of justice, the petitioner can be allowed for granting one last opportunity to the petitioner-accused no. 1 to adduce his evidence as D.W., subject to payment of a reasonable cost. Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed. Resultantly, the petitioner who is facing the trial as accused no. 1 in the complaint case, C.R Case no. 1822/2015 is allowed to adduce his evidence as D.W. on the next date of listing, that is, on 06.09.2025, subject to deposit of a sum of Rs. 10,000/- on that date, as such a sum, in the considered view of this Court, is found to be reasonable. On deposit of such amount for Rs. 10,000/- by the petitioner-accused no. 1, the said amount is to be disbursed to the complainant upon proper identification. Page No.# 4/4 10. With the observations made and the directions given above, the criminal petition is disposed of. No cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant