Back
GITA GOPI
DILIPBHAI BHAGWANDAS ASWANI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GITA GOPI, J.
1. Rule. Learned APP and learned Advocate Mr. Bhamare waive service of notice of rule on behalf of respective parties. By consent, rule is fixed forthwith.
2. Heard learned advocates for respective parties.
3. The revisionist is the original complainant in a proceeding under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, which was before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand, in Criminal Case No. 2403 of 2018, wherein the accused, husband and wife, came to be acquitted by an order dated 30.12.2019.
4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand; the de facto complainant filed a Criminal Appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘Cr.P.C’). The present Revision is challenging the order below Exh.11 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Anand, in Criminal Appeal No. 94 of 2020, where the original complainant as an appellant, had moved the Court under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C., making a prayer to produce additional evidence, stating it to be necessary for the evaluation of the evidence and just decision of the case. The prayer was made to take on reco
The court emphasized that additional evidence under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C. must not prejudice the accused and should only be admitted if necessary to prevent a failure of justice.
Point of Law : Application for taking additional evidence on record at an appellate stage, even if filed during the pendency of the appeal, is to be heard at the time of final hearing of the appeal a....
The appellate court's discretion under Section 391 Cr.P.C. to admit additional evidence must be exercised cautiously and cannot be used to fill gaps in existing evidence.
Point of law : Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India confers a Fundamental Right upon an accused, who has been arrested by the police to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.
The appellate court has the authority to admit additional evidence but must do so according to procedural law, ensuring fairness and compliance with defined legal requirements.
The admission of the genuineness of prosecution documents by the defense counsel without summoning the authors of those documents to establish their authenticity is a serious lapse and causes prejudi....
The power to receive additional evidence under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases where it is necessary for rendering substantial justice.
The exercise of powers under Section 391 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows the Appellate Court discretion to admit additional evidence to uphold justice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
