Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

-Vs- State of Madhya Pradesh (1985 Criminal Law 43 [Spl.C.C.92/2004-J] Jounal 1773). It is true that as per Section 162 of the Cr.P.C., Statement given by a person to a Police Officer in the course of investigation shall not be used for any purpose at any enquiry or trial.

49. In the first case, while giving evidence in the Court and in the witness box itself, the witness had made substantial and material use of his Statement and the trial Court had made a note about this fact. On considering the said note and as the witness used the Statement in the witness box itself during trial, it is held by the Privy Council that such an use of Statement contrary to Section 162(1) of the Cr.P.C., renders the evidence of that witness incompetent. The said legal position is not disputed by the Complainant. In the second case, when the decision in the case of Zahiruddin, referred to above, was cited by the Appellant's Counsel with reference to an FIR on the ground that the said document was referred to by the witness to refresh his memory in the witness box, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that the said decision was of no assistance to the Appellant's Counsel to substantiate his arguments. Facts of the second case are altogether different from those of the case on hand. In the third case, earlier Statement given by the witness was read out to him before entering into the witness box and he was asked to give the same Statement in the Court. Under such circumstance, Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that there was violation of Section 162 of the 44 [Spl.C.C.92/2004-J] Cr.P.C., by relying upon the decision in the case of Zahiruddin, referred to above. As observed above, in Zahiruddin's case, the witness used his previous Statement in the witness box itself. In the case on hand, P.W.9 did not use or refer his previous Statement while giving evidence and no one asked him to depose in the court as per that Statement. Hence, seeing the Statement in the Court premises does not fall within the purview of using of the Statement at the trial. As such, facts and circumstances of all the decisions relied upon by the Counsel for the Accused-1 are different from those of the case on hand. Hence, they are of no assistance to substantiate his arguments.