Back
PANKAJ JAIN
Manikaran Sales – Appellant
Versus
Vivek Gupta – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
Pankaj Jain, J.(Oral) - Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. impugning order dated 11.08.2023 (Annexure P9) passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in appeal No.26/2017 whereby the application filed by petitioners under Section 391 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
2. Petitioner No.2 earned conviction in a complaint filed against him for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881vide judgment dated 14.12.2016 (Annexure P5). While leading defense evidence before Ld. Trial Court the petitioners sought to summon certain police officials who as per them have conducted an inquiry on their complaint filed with the police alleging forgery of the cheques. After the police officials failed to appear, the evidence of the petitioners was closed vide order dated 16.03.2016. Against the said order, the petitioners preferred a revision. Admittedly, the Revisional Court granted three opportunities to the petitioners to lead their defense evidence. It is being claimed by counsel for the petitioners that despite having been served the police officials they failed to appear and thus after expiry of those three opportunities the judgment of convic
The appellate court's power to admit additional evidence under Section 391 CrPC is limited to exceptional cases where justice necessitates it.
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.
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 central legal point established in the judgment is that the power to record additional evidence under Section 391 CrPC should be exercised with caution and circumspection, and the party seeking t....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to record additional evidence under Section 391 Cr.P.C. should only be exercised when the party making such request was prevented fr....
Production of additional evidence – Powers under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. are to be exercised judiciously and not for mere asking.
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
