1982 Supreme(Raj) 346
G.M.LODHA, N.M.KASLIWAL
Sheoram Singh : Sukhdeva and Ram Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
For the Petitioner:K.N. Garg for Sheoram Singh, Advocate.
For the Petitioner:N.L. Tibrewal for Sukhdeva, Advocates.
For the Petitioner:S.C. Sharma for Bhura, Advocate.
For the Petitioner:D.K. Soral for Kamod and Another, Advocate.
For the Petitioner:M.M. Ranjan for Surendra Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Jagdish Dhankar, G.G. Sharma, P.P.
JUDGMENT
1. - Whether the `evidence' as used in Section 319, Cr.P.C, signifies and means the evidence recorded in the court, or it can also include the evidence recorded by the police both, oral and documentary; is the pivot of important legal debate in this reference? The conflicting views of the learned Judge sitting in Single Bench in this court and absence of any authoritative pronouncement of the Apex court has resulted in this reference by the learned Single Judge.
2. The present bunch of five cases are taken together and decided by one common judgment because of the joint prayer of the learned counsel for the parties and the unanimity amongst them that all the five would swim or swing together solely and only on the basis of the interpretation which this bench would put on the connotation evidence as used in Section 319, Cr.P.C.
3. It is not necessary to mention the facts because in all the five cases, the petitioners accused who have come up before this Court, were not challaned by the police. No evidence was recorded against them, either by the committing court, or by the Sessions Courts. Only on an application or prayer of the public prosecutor, they have been made accused
Click Here to Read the rest of this document