Back
1987 Supreme(Guj) 76
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :D.C.GHEEWALA, J.P.DESAI
Hamidulla - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeals 1159 of 1986
Decided On : 09/03/1987
Headnote:
Constitution of India 1950 – Section 162 - Contradiction - Constrained to observe - Before parting with this judgment are constrained to observe here that Sessions Judge committed an error in bringing on record in evidence Should not have been permitted to state in evidence recorded in Sessions Case what came to his knowledge during course of investigation of other case - Judge fell in error in allowing this to be brought on record of this case – Held, knowledge of investigating Officer while recording statement of a witness cannot be allowed to be brought on record as allowed in present case Sessions Judge - A question is first required to be put to witness about contradiction if any between evidence of witness and his statement recorded by Investigating Officer and if witness denies then that contradiction has to be proved by the evidence of Police Officer who has to look into the statement of witness and give reply in that regard - A general statement as is brought on record at of deposition of P. S. L could not and should not have been permitted – Order accordingly
( 1 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 2 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 3 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 4 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 5 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 6 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 7 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 8 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 9 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 10 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 11 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 12 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 13 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 14 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 15 ) X x x x x x x x x. ]
( 16 ) BEFORE parting with this judgment, we are constrained to observe here that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge committed an error in bringing on record in the evidence of P. S. I. Sajjansinh Parmar P. W. 19 Exh. 71 what came to the knowledge of the said officer during the investigation of other Sessions case. In the evidence of said P. S. I. , it is stated at para 3 as follows :-
( 17 ) P. S. I. should not have (been) permitted to state in the evidence recorded in Sessions Case No. 6/86 what came to his knowledge during the course of the investigation of other case. The learned Judge fell in error in allowing this to be brought on record of this case.
( 18 ) IT is also stated by P. S. I. Sajjansinh Parmar at para 4 as follows :-
( 19 ) THIS is also not permissible. Any part of a statement of a witness before the Investigating Officer can be brought on record only by way of contradiction as per S. 162 of the Code. What came to the knowledge of the investigating Officer while recording the statement of a witness cannot be allowed to be brought on record as allowed in the present case by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. A question is first required to be put to the witness about the contradiction, if any, between the evidence of the witness and his statement recorded by the Investigating Officer and if the witness denies then that contradiction has to be proved by the evidence of Police Officer who has to look into the statement of the witness and give reply in that regard. A general statement as is brought on record at para 4 of the deposition of P. S. L could not and should not have been permitted. Appeal allowed.
.
