VIJENDRA SINGH S/O SHRI RAJA RAM R/O 37, CIVIL LINES ROORKEE, DISTRICT HARDWAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH S.S.P. HARDWAR
LAWS(UTN)-2012-4-111
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on April 18,2012

Vijendra Singh S/O Shri Raja Ram R/O 37, Civil Lines Roorkee, District Hardwar Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Uttarakhand Through S.S.P. Hardwar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prafulla C. Pant, J - (1.) HEARD . By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.01.2012, passed by learned IInd Fast Track Court/Additional Sessions Judge, Hardwar, in Sessions Trial No. 169 of 2004, whereby said court has rejected the application 154b moved by the accused for summoning Junior Scientific Officer of CFSL Chandigarh as a witness.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that, the petitioner Vijendra Singh is one of the accused facing trial in respect of offences punishable under section 302 and 120B of I.P.C., Police Station Gangnahar, Roorkee, in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/ IInd Fast Track Court, Hardwar. Admittedly, the prosecution evidence has been recorded, and after recording of statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C., it is a stage of recording of evidence in defence. At that stage, the accused moved an application for summoning Junior Scientific Officer of Central Forensic Science Laboratory Chandigarh to prove the report dated 11.02.2004, already on record. Perusal of the papers on record shows that the report dated 11.02.2004, of CFSL Chandigarh was admitted by the defence counsel and exhibited by the court as Ex -A18. Later, prosecution moved an application No. 148b for de -exhibiting the document as the prosecution did not want to rely on it, which was rejected by the trial court vide its order dated 23.03.2011, as such the document remained exhibited and can be relied by either of the parties. In the above circumstances, rejection of application no. 154b moved by the defence for proving said document does not suffer from any illegality. However, the observation made by the trial court at the time of the rejection of said application that the admissibility of the document shall be examined at the time of final hearing is erroneous in law and uncalled for. Ofcourse the weight of the evidence can certainly be examined by the trial court at the time of final arguments, but it can not be said that the admissibility of exhibited document would be seen after completion of defence evidence. With the above observation this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., stands disposed of.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.