1. The respondents Nos.1 and 2-original accused persons, although served with the notice issued by this Court, yet have chosen not to remain present before this Court either in person or through an advocate and oppose this application.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Tushar Chaudhari, the learned counsel, waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.3-original first informant.

3. By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the State of Gujarat calls in question the legality and validity of the order passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Banaskantha dated 05.01.2018 below Exh.125 in the Sessions Case No.40 of 2011. It appears that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 have been put on trial for the offence of murder in the court of the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Deesa. In the course of the investigation, the Circle Officer was asked by the Investigating Officer to prepare a map of the scene of offence. Accordingly, the map was prepared and is sought to be relied upon by the prosecution by adducing the same in evidence. This map of the scene of offence was prepared, at the relevant point of time, by one Popatlal S. Trivedi, serving as a Circle Officer in the office of the Dantiwada Taluka Panchayat. Popatlal S. Trivedi has retired from the service. In such circumstances, the prosecution sought to adduce the map of the scene of offence in evidence through the P.W. No.20, namely, Manabhai Ajabhai Patel. This Manabhai, as on date, is serving as the In-charge Panchayat Circle Officer in the office of the Dantiwada Taluka Panchayat. The deposition of the P.W. No.20 is extracted hereunder;

“Sessions Case No. 40 / 2011

Exhibit No. 125

Deposition of Prosecution Witness No. 20

I do hereby on solemn affirmation state that

My Name		Manabhai Ajabhai Patel
Religion	Hindu	Mobile No.	9426749101
Age about	57 years	Occupation	Job
Residence	Dantiwada	District	Banaskantha
Oath administered	Examination in chief	A.P.P.	Mr. D.K. Purohit

At present, I have been discharging my duties as the In- Charge Panchayat Circle Officer in the Dantiwada Taluka Panchayat. Popatlal S. Trivedi had been discharging his duties as the Circle Officer on 11/12/2010. He received police yaadi to prepare a map of the scene of offence in connection with the offence registered vide I C.R. No. 78/10 with Panthavada Police Station. He prepared the map of the scene of offence on the basis of the panchnama and the said yaadi and kept it in the Taluka Panchayat Office. He has retired from the Dantiwada Panchayat about two years back from today. I have brought the said map today as the same was given to me by the staff of the Taluka Panchayat and I produce the same, which bears his signature. I identify it. (Defence has raised objection in exhibiting this document and also to bring the same on record.) First of all, before the Prosecution opens its case, all the documentary evidences have to be produced in the court. It is further submitted that the copy of the documentary evidences, relied upon by the Prosecution, have to be submitted in the court of the Magistrate u/s 207 before the case is committed. The practice of the Prosecution of adducing the document at the last stage cannot be termed as fair trial. The Defence has not been able to defend himself till the final stage of the trial. Further, the said map has not been prepared by the witness, who has produced the same and he was not present at the relevant point of time. He is not aware of the said documentary evidence. He has not deposed in his deposition as to under whose custody the said document was after it was prepared and as to from whose custody he has brought it. Further, looking at the said map, it appears that it was made in December, 2010, but it has not been explained as to why Prosecution has concealed the