SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(MP) 573

SUBODH ABHYANKAR
Sunil – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri S. K. Vyas Senior Advocate with Shri Harshvardhan Pathak Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Mridula Sen – G.A./P.L., Shri Amar Singh Rathore Adv.

Judgement Key Points

What is the appropriate party to file an application to produce additional documents in a sessions trial? What is the status and applicability of Section 242 Cr.P.C. in sessions trials regarding witness-produced documents? What is the correct procedure for admitting additional documents in a sessions trial, and how should witnesses or prosecutors proceed?

Key Points: - The petitioner’s case concerns whether a witness can submit documents not included in the charge-sheet in a sessions trial. (!) (!) - The Court held that Section 242 Cr.P.C. is not applicable to sessions trials, and only the prosecution may submit additional documents; witnesses cannot independently introduce documents. (!) (!) (!) - The appropriate method to bring in additional documents is through the prosecution and via the procedure of further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C., not by witness-led submission. (!) (!)

What is the appropriate party to file an application to produce additional documents in a sessions trial?

What is the status and applicability of Section 242 Cr.P.C. in sessions trials regarding witness-produced documents?

What is the correct procedure for admitting additional documents in a sessions trial, and how should witnesses or prosecutors proceed?


ORDER :

1. Heard finally, with the consent of the parties.

2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 14.08.2023 passed by VIII Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Sessions Trial No.96 of 2022 arising out of Crime No.71 of 2021, registered at Police Station – Mahila Thana, Indore under Sections 376 & 506 of IPC whereby, an application filed by the prosecutrix under Section 242 of Cr.P.C. has been allowed.

3. In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner is facing the aforesaid trial under Sections 376 & 506 of IPC, which is at the stage of recording of evidence. During the proceedings, an application under Section 242 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the prosecutrix along with 43- 45 documents, contending that the police did not file the aforesaid documents due to some error on their part. The aforesaid application was opposed by the petitioner; however, the learned Judge of the trial Court, vide the impugned order dated 14.08.2023, has allowed the application, and the aforesaid documents have been directed to be taken on record with the observations that the petitioner would have the opportunity to rebut the same.

4. S

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top