Patna High Court - Orders
Sandeep Suman @ Pushpanjay vs The State Of Bihar on 17 January, 2023
Author: A. M. Badar
Bench: A. M. Badar, Sandeep Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.218 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2016 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Nalanda
======================================================
Sandeep Suman @ Pushpanjay
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Javed Aslam, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR)
9 17-01-2023Interlocutory Application No.2 of 2022 has been filed by the appellant/convicted accused in exercising the powers under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C. for permitting the appellant/convicted accused to adduce additional evidence at the appellate stage.
Main contention of the appellant/convicted accused is to the effect that the victim of sexual offences was immediately examined after the incident by one of the prosecution witness Dr. Krishna on 09.02.2016 itself and the incident allegedly took place on 06.02.2016. In this backdrop, according to the learned counsel for the appellant/convicted accused, Dr. Krishna is the most material witness as he would be in a position to disclose Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.218 of 2019(9) dt.17-01-2023 2/3 whether the prosecutrix was having marks of sexual offence on her body. It is further argued that by skipping prosecution witness Dr. Krishna, some other Medical Officers were examined by the prosecution during the course of trial and those Medical Officers have examined the prosecutrix later on, i.e., after eleven days and, therefore, such evidence is not of much consequence. What is relevant is findings after medical examination of the victim by Dr. Krishna. With this, it is argued that as the prosecution failed to examine its cited witness Dr. Krishna, this Court should record evidence of Dr. Krishna.
In order to examine this argument we pose a question to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing before the Court as to whether documents of medical examination of the prosecutrix by Dr. Krishna were on the record of learned trial Court being a part of police report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor is seeking time and at the same time he is arguing on some other aspects which according to us are totally irrelevant for the purpose of deciding the application under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C.
Considering the importance of the matter, we direct the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna, to file his personal affidavit within a period of two weeks clarifying the factual Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.218 of 2019(9) dt.17-01-2023 3/3 aspect as to whether documents of medical examination of the prosecutrix by PW 15 Dr. Krishna (a charge sheeted witness) were part of the police report filed under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. before the concerned Court. Failure to comply with this order shall be construed as interference in administration of justice.
Post this matter on 01.02.2023 under the appropriate heading.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor to communicate this order to the concerned authority for compliance. A copy of this order be supplied to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
(A. M. Badar, J) ( Sandeep Kumar, J) Mkr./-
U T