JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the accused petitioners and the Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. 2. This petition under S. 482 CrPC has been filed by accused petitioners against the order dated 10.10.2000 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer in criminal case No. 194/84 by which the application filed by accused petitioners under S. 311 CrPC was rejected. 3. The facts, in short, giving rise to file this petition are that the accused petitioners are facing trial before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer in the abovementioned criminal case. On 23.9.2000 the case was fixed for recording evidence of prosecution witnesses. Statements of PW 2 Madho Singh, PW 3 Laxmi Narayan Chauhan, PW 4 Santosh Kumar Tandon and PW 5 Goss Mohammad were recorded by the learned Magistrate on 23.9.2000 but on that day the counsel for accused petitioners was not present, hence they were not cross-examined. On 3.10.2000 an application was moved on behalf of the accused petitioners that the abovementioned witnesses be recalled for purposes of cross-examination. That application was rejected by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 10.10.2000. Aggrieved by the said order this petition has been filed. 4. The only contention raised by counsel for accused petitioners is that no mala fide can be attributed on the part of accused petitioners as they had already filed an application on 21.9.2000 stating that on 23.9.2000 their counsel would not be present in court, therefore, evidence of the prosecution witnesses could not have been recorded and an opportunity should have been given to them in the interest of justice. 5. In my opinion, a party should not be punished for the fault of his counsel and since on 21.9.2000 an application had already been moved on behalf of the accused petitioners stating that their counsel would not be available on 23.9.2000 in court, therefore, in the interest of justice an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses whose evidence 30 have been recorded on 23.9.2000 in the absence of counsel for accused petitioners, should be given. 6. Consequently, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.10.2000 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer is set aside and the application dated 3.10.2000 filed under S. 311 CrPC by accused petitioners, is allowed. 6. Consequently, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.10.2000 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer is set aside and the application dated 3.10.2000 filed under S. 311 CrPC by accused petitioners, is allowed. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer is directed that one opportunity be given to the accused petitioners to cross-examine PW 2 Madho Singh, PW 3 Laxmi Narayan Chauhan, PW 4 Santosh Kumar Tandon and PW 5 Goss Mohammad, and prosecution is also directed to recall these witnesses and present in the court for cross-examination. It is made clear that once the witnesses are recalled, it shall be responsibility of the accused petitioners to cross-examine them on the same day.Petition allowed. *******