1. This revision arises against the order passed by the learned Principal Special Judge for CBI cases, Chennai dated 10.08.2011, on a memo filed by the petitioners, who are the accused 4 & 5 in C.C.No.82 of 2001 pending trial for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w. 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and u/s.13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, objecting to the marking of certain documents which were seized under the seizure memo Ex.B630.

2. The documents sought to be marked were orders passed by the Commercial Tax Department and it was contended that P.W.58, an official of the Vigilance Department could not speak to the contents thereof. It was further informed that such documents were xerox copies and therefore, not primary evidence. It also was complained that it was the prosecution practice to mark inadmissible documents or mark admissible documents through incompetent witness and make the witnesses read the contents and record the same as evidence. It was stated that the statement prepared by P.W.58 at the instance of the Investigating Officer during investigation had been marked as Ex.P628 and Ex.P629 in the case. Further, the contents thereof had been