SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant miscellaneous petition has been preferred by the petitioners assailing the order dated 16.4.2013 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Udaipur in Cr. Appeal No. 31/2005 whereby the petitioner's application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners after being tried were convicted for the offence under Sections 27-B, 27-D and 28-A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for having manufactured absorbent cotton wool during the period their licence was invalid. The judgment of conviction was passed on 28.4.2005. The plea of the accused in the trial Court was that no production was undertaken during the period for which the prosecution was launched. The trial Court observed that the accused should have presented the relevant documents i.e. the stock register etc. The accused were put on notice by the Drug Inspector during the pre-complaint enquiries to produce the relevant record but despite being provided ample opportunity, they did not bring the documents on record and thus they were held guilty of the offence.
(3.) The accused filed Appeal No. 31/2005 challenging their conviction. On 15.6.2006, an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. was moved by the accused claiming that the documents, non-presentation whereof was taken adverse to them became available to the accused later on and as such they should be permitted to bring such documents on record by leading additional evidence. The application thus filed by the accused under Section 391 Cr.P.C. was rejected by the appellate Court vide order dated 16.4.2013. Hence, this petition.;