Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

State Of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Sakoli ... vs Akram Khan Munirkhan Pathan And 4 Others on 9 December, 2022

Author: G.A. Sanap

Bench: G. A. Sanap

                                                                    26 revn 195.22.odt..odt
                                         1/3



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
         CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.195 OF 2022

       State of Maharashtra,through PSO, PS Sakoli District Bhandara
                                   (Vs.)
                 Akram Khan Munirkhan Pathan and others
_______________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions                       Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
                      Shri S.A. Ashirgade, APP for the State.
                      Shri K.S. Motwani, Advocate for the non-applicant Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5.



                      CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J.

DATE : 09.12.2022.

                                   Heard         learned       Advocate         for      the
                      applicant/State.


                      2.           Perused the record and proceedings.                  The

order impugned in this revision application is dated 14.06.2022 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara was pleased to reject the application made at Exh.167 for filing the additional document on record. The document was sought to be produced on record at the stage of evidence of Investigating Officer (PW-5). It is stated that this document was part of the 26 revn 195.22.odt..odt 2/3 remand proceeding. It is submitted that this is not an attempt to fill up lacuna.

3. Perusal of the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge would show that learned Additional Sessions Judge was not convinced with this reason. It is to be noted that charge-sheet in the crime was filed as per Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. The document sought to be produced at the belated stage was not compiled with the charge sheet as well as not mentioned in the list of the documents filed with the charge sheet.

4. It is to be noted that if such new evidence is obtained after filing of charge sheet, it can be filed by submitting a formal supplementary report/charge-sheet. It is to be noted that even after filing of the charge-sheet, the Investigating Officer has a right to conduct the investigation and collect the new evidence as provided under Section 173 (8) of the Cr.P.C.

5. In my view, in this case, the Investigating Officer would have taken recourse to this procedure. I am conscious of the fact that the evidence of Investigating officer (PW-5) is in progress. However, even today also if 26 revn 195.22.odt..odt 3/3 the document is relevant and necessary to decide the important factual question, the same can be taken on record by following the procedure provided under the Cr.P.C. by filing the supplementary report/charge sheet. It is to be noted that the production of new document or evidence cannot be allowed in this manner.

6. I do not see any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned Judge.

7. Therefore, Criminal Revision is rejected being devoid of substance.

JUDGE manisha Signed By:MANISHA ALOK SHEWALE Signing Date:12.12.2022 17:57