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

1994 Supreme(Cal) 106

Nikhil Nath Bhattacharjee
Pradip Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Sekhar Basu, Debasish Roy for the petitioners;
Ms. Alakananda Bhose for the State.

ORDER

This revisional application under s. 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against an order dated 15.7.91 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Birbhum, in Sessions case No. 85 of 1989 arising under s. 498A, 306/304 of the Indian Penal Code. By the said order, the learned Sessions Judge rejected the application of the accused persons filed on 6th June, 1990 before him praying leave of the Court to file some documents, namely letters exchanged between the family of the accused petitioners and the family of the parents of the deceased as per Annexure to the petition. In the said application the accused/petitioners prayed that the learned Judge should ask the prosecution to admit or deny genuineness of those letters as per provision under s. 294 Cr.P.C. It was urged before him on behalf of the accused/petitioners that s. 294 Cr.P.C. was applicable at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceeding and if the genuineness of the letters was not disputed, to consider the said letters along with the materials and documents as may be produced by the prosecution at the time of consideration of framing of charge.

2. The learned Sessions Judge by his impugned order cons
















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