Back
SANJEEV KUMAR
Amit Kumar son of Ram Kumar – Appellant
Versus
UT of Jammu and Kashmir Th. SHO Police Station ANTF Gandhi Nagar Jammu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner is facing criminal trial in FIR No. 14/22 registered under Sections 8/20/29 of NDPS Act in the Court of learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu [‘trial Court’]. The matter is yet to be taken up by the trial Court for framing of charge.
2. With a view to contest framing of charge, an application under Section 91 Cr.PC came to be filed by the petitioner before the trial Court to call for the Tower location (CDR) of Airtel Mobile No. 9034909052 and Jio Mobile No. 8708236962 belonging to the petitioner and also the Tower Location (CDR) of two mobile numbers of co-accused, namely Ombir. A request was also made to call for the record of toll tax paid through the Fastag affixed to the Hyundai Creta car of the petitioner bearing Registration No. HR29AV-3483 at Ban Toll Plaza, Nagrota on 14.10.2022 along with CCTV footage of 14.10.2022. The application was filed on the ground that the petitioner and co-accused are suffering incarceration for the last more than ten months for no fault of their. The petitioner is a business man who deals in sale and purchase of apples and in connection thereof, he along with his friend were coming back from Kashmir on 14.10.
At the stage of framing of charge, the court can only consider material produced by the prosecution. The accused cannot invoke Section 91 to prove innocence, unless material of sterling quality has b....
(1) Section 91 Cr.P.C. does not confer any right on accused to produce document in his possession to prove his defence.(2) Application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. at instance of accused would lie even a....
The accused cannot invoke Section 91 CrPC to produce documents for defense at the charge framing stage; only prosecution materials are considered.
The accused does not have the right to invoke Sec. 91 of the CrPC for document production at the stage of framing charges; such rights are reserved for the defense stage of the trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that accused persons are entitled to invoke Section 91 CrPC after the filing of the charge-sheet, and the trial Court has the jurisdiction to direc....
At the discharge stage, an accused cannot seek production of documents under Section 91 of Cr.P.C, as the right to produce evidence arises only during the trial phase.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's entitlement to seek production of documents under Sec. 91 would ordinarily not come till the stage of defense, and the expressio....
The accused's right to a fair trial, the obligation of the prosecution to make fair disclosure, and the accused's entitlement to relevant documents collected during the investigation were central leg....
The accused cannot be compelled to produce incriminatory documents based on his knowledge, as established by the interpretation of Section 94 of Cr.P.C. and relevant case laws.
(1) Documents which were not part of charge-sheet, but seized by investigating agency during investigation of offence, cannot be withheld by prosecution merely on the ground that documents sought to ....
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
