Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"13. Corroboration of complainant's version of payment of Rs. 4000/-, came from PW.7 - Ramdas Gedam. Complainant and Gedam, both deposed that Gedam took entry of that payment in his personal diary. PW.7 -
Gedam further deposed that he paid that amount of Rs. 4,000/- to accused on 12.12.1998. Gedam proved such entry in his diary, which is at Ex-146 which shows that Gedam received Rs. 4,000/- from member of Dolphin Society on 25.11.1998 and then he paid back that amount to accused on Apeal455.2010 1.12.1998. However, that diary was 3-4 years old at that time and it was not maintained in regular course of business or as per sequence of events. Therefore, no importance can be attached to such entries in diary of Gedam. I do not hesitate to fall back on ratio laid down in the authority of 'L.K. Advani -Vs- C.B.I., 1997 Cr.L.J. 2559 (C) (Delhi)' in which it was held that diary haphazardly maintained, can not come within the ambit of books of accounts and so not admissible as evidence. Such is the case in hand also.