Bombay High Court
State Of Maharashtra vs Kalyanrao Daulatrao Vidhate And Ors on 3 May, 2024
Author: N. J. Jamadar
Bench: N. J. Jamadar
2024:BHC-AS:21201
911-wpst-11110-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 11110 OF 2023
State of Maharashtra ...Petitioner
vs.
Kalyanrao Daulatrao Vidhate & Ors ...Respondents
Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP, for the Petitioner.
None for the Respondent.
Mr. Dilip Bhosle, PSI, S.T.F. E.O.W., Mumbai.
CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.
DATE : 3rd May, 2024
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned APP.
AMOL
PREMNATH
JADHAV 2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India Digitally signed by AMOL PREMNATH JADHAV seeks to assail an order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Date: 2024.05.07 17:55:03 +0530 Judge on an application (Exhibit 156) in Sessions Case No. 1171 of 2001 dated 23rd February, 2023 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge ruled that the witness (autopsy surgeon) cannot be permitted to read and depose about the Post Mortem on the basis of the report available in Court record. The witness can be allowed to testify about the documents available in the Court records which he wants to refer for refreshing his memory.
3. Mr Agarkar, the learned APP submits that the prosecution Amol ...1 ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/05/2024 10:04:29 ::: 911-wpst-11110-2023.doc was constrained to make the application (Exhibit 156) as the learned Session Judge was of the view that the prosecution can only examine the witness with reference to the injuries/facts noted in column no. 17 and 18 of the post mortem report. It was submitted that the post mortems were conducted 29 years ago and therefore the autopsy surgeon is entitled to refresh the memory.
4. So far as the ruling on the reference to the documents to refresh the memory, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has correctly observed that the witness cannot be permitted to read out from the document already filed in the Court and depose. The witness may peruse the document with a view of refresh his memory and then depose. The submission on behalf of the prosecution that the learned Additional Sessions Judge ruled that the examination of the autopsy surgeon would be restricted to entries made in column no. 17 and 18 of the Post Mortem report, is not borne out by impugned order. Nonetheless, in view of the possibility of the prejudice, it is clarified that the examination of the autopsy surgeon or the officer who witnessed the post mortem cannot be restricted to entries made and injuries noted in column no. 17 and 18 of the Post Mortem report.
5. With the aforesaid clarification, the petition stands disposed of.
Amol ...2 ::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/05/2024 10:04:29 ::: 911-wpst-11110-2023.doc
6. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(N. J. JAMADAR, J.)
Amol ...3
::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 16/05/2024 10:04:29 :::