The interpretation of section 311 of the Cr. P. C. and the limitations on permitting the exhibition of documents adverse to the accused.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner is an accused facing trial vide Sessions Trial No. 453/06 vide Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-V, Saran at Chapra.

3. Husband of Smt. Sunita Devi died unnatural death on 23.07.2004. The wife lodged U.D. case on 27.07.2004. The brother of the deceased thereafter lodged an F.I.R. after 19 days alleging therein that the petitioner had abeted suicide of his brother. Accordingly, the F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner under section 306 of the I.P.C. and the same was investigated and charge sheet was submitted in the year, 2006. The case was thereafter committed to the court of Sessions where the charges were framed and the case was taken up for trial. At the trial several prosecution witnesses including the wife of the deceased except the Investigating officer and the doctor were examined. The wife of the deceased namely, Sunita Devi was examined as P.W.3 on 20.8.2009 and discharged. Several years thereafter two applications were filed on behalf of the prosecution. The applications are annexed as Annexure-3 series. By the first application, the prosecution sought recall of PW 3 for her re-deposition on the certain points, i.e. availability of the suicidal note and extra judicial confession made by the petitioner before the wife (P.W.3). In the second application the prosecution prayed for exhibiting these documents in the case. The same was resisted by the petitioner. On a consideration of the matter, the learned Trial Court allowed the applications holding as under:-

“Abhiyojan pach se kaha gaya ki kisi bhi pachkar ko kisi sakshi ko pesh karne se nahi roka jana chaiye. Kisi sakhis ka sakhiyak mulya kya hoga yeh nirnay ke dauran ubhay pachho ko sunne ke bad nayalaya dwara bichhar hoga. Mere bichhar se yadi koi pakshkar koi sakshya prastut karma chata hai or wo mukdme ke uchit nirnay hetu mahtawpurn ho sakta hai to usko prastut karne ki anumati di jani chaiya. Prastut sachya ka satwik mulya ka nirdharan nayalaya ko karma hai. Abhiyozan pachha ke do kagjat jisme mritak ka atma-hatya tipni (Suicidal note) or abhiyukta ke nayayik bahya sanswikriti ka kagaj hai, jo es mukdeme me arop ko sabit karne ya na sabit karne me mahtwapurna bhumika nibha sakte hai.Aisi parisththi me abhiyojan pachha ko ukt kagjato ko sabit karane or pradarsh karane ki anumati di jati hai. Uski satyata ke sambandh me ubhay pachho ke sunane ke pashat nayayalay ke dwara nayayaochi adesh parit kiya jayega. Atah, abhiyojan pacha ka awaden dinak 30.6.2012 swikrit kiya jata hai or abhiyojan pachha ko nirdesh diya jata hai or ki yatha-sigra use sabit karane or pradarsh karane ki karwai kare,chuki yeh apradhik wad kafi purana hai.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the provisions contained under section 311 of the Cr. P. C. is required to be exercised carefully. On the one hand the evidence which is deemed just and proper for doing complete justice between the parties should be allowed to be adduced. On the other hand care has to be that the said provision should not be utilized by the prosecution to fill up the lacunae in the prosecution. It is next submitted that invoking jurisdiction under section 311 of the Cr. P. C. documents adverse to the interest of the accused can not be allowed to be brought on record. Admittedly the suicidal note as well as the alleged extra judicial confession made by the petitioner before the wife of the deceased, were made much prior to the filing of the charge sheet. Those documents were not produced in course of investigation and did not form part of the police investigation report. Those documents, therefore, cannot be allowed to be exhibited in the case which shall be prejudicial to the defence. In this connection, he has relied on a judgment of this Court in Bhola Shukla vs. State of Bihar (2009) 4 PLJR-176. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the said part of the order re