Honble CHAUHAN, J.–Accused of offence under Section 376 (g) IPC, wanting to defend his liberty and honor, the petitioner had moved an application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. for seeking the production of certain documents which were available with the police, but which the prosecution chose not to file with the charge sheet However, vide order dated 22.8.05, the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur dismissed the said application. Hence, this petition before us.

(2). The brief facts of the case are that on 13.9.04, the prosecutrixs father lodged a report a Police Station Murlipura, Jaipur. However, in the said report he did not claim any fact with regard to sexual exploitation of his daughter, Miss. Reena Sharma by the accused petitioner and by others. Subsequently, the prosecutrix lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others before the Mahila Thana and the Police Station, Murlipura, wherein she alleged sexual exploitation by them. On the basis of the complaint lodged at Police Station Murlipura, a formal FIR, FIR No. 333/2004, was registered for offences under Sections 342, 376 (g), 323, and 328 IPC against the petitioner and others. Moreover, durin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document