Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.)This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 20.03.2013 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, arising out of FIR No.165 of 2000 registered with Police Station Pacca Danga, Jammu, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 363, 342, 354, 376 & 511 RPC.
(2.)Petitioners in the memo of criminal revision have stated that the trial Court by virtue of order dated 20.03.2013 has again directed recording of the additional statements of the petitioners/accused under Section 342 Cr. P. C. It is stated that the said order is against the law and facts, so the same is not sustainable. It is stated that the power exercised by the trial Court while passing the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of Section 342 Cr. P. C., as the statement can be recorded only once. It is further stated that the trial Court has no power to fill the lacunas left by the prosecution and the trial Court has misconstrued the aforesaid provisions while passing the order impugned.
(3.)On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the purpose of recording again the statements under Section 342 Cr.P.C. is to put incriminating circumstances to the accused, so that he may not be prejudice in his defence.