SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Cal) 79

GITESH RANJAN BHATTACHARJEE
BROJENDRA NATH KOLEY – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
CHAITANYA CHANDRA MUKHERJI, PRADIP GHOSH

GITESH RANJAN BHATTACHARJEE, J.


( 1 ) G. R. Bhattacharjee, J.-The short question that arises for decision in this revisional proceeding is whether at the stage of consideration of framing of charge by the Court the accused can demand production, inspection or supply of copies of documents which were seized by the police during the investigation of the case but copies of which were not supplied to the accused under section 207 Cr. P. C. on the ground that the prosecution would not rely on those documents at the trial of the case. In the present case charge-sheet has been submitted under sections 120b, 199 and 377a I. P. C. The allegation of the prosecution in short is that during a specified period there was withdrawal of a total amount of more than Rs. 4,67,900/from the banks by cheques out of which there was a defalcation of more than Rs. 55,000/- against false vouchers. The two petitioners who along with others are the accused in the case were the Directors of the Company and the allegation is that three Directors were authorised to sign cheques on behalf of the company severally and out of them one is now dead. During investigation police seized 112 cheques out of which copies o









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top